The Villas At Robbinsdale
3130 Grimes Avenue North, Robbinsdale, MN 55422 · For profit - Corporation · 75 certified beds · (763) 588-0771 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (31% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- 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
- inspectors cited 2 immediate-jeopardy problems — the most serious level
- a high number of inspection citations overall (40) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $104,974 in federal fines (most recent 2026-03-17)
- its payroll-based staffing score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 2 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's staffing rating runs 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the staffing score rests on the facility's own payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 2 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 2 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 2 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 1 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 18.1% | 18.2% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 11.9% | 4.1% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.5% | 1.9% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.8% | 2.6% | 2.0% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 1.0% | 4.1% | 6.5% | better |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 3.6% | 4.0% | 3.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 25.3% | 20.5% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 5.0% | 12.5% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 98.4% | 96.1% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 9.0% | 5.2% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 21.7% | 24.5% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 9.6% | 17.1% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 2.8% | 1.9% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 87.9% | 82.7% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 30.4% | 23.5% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 15.2% | 14.8% | 12.0% | worse |
‡ 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.
47.0% 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 62 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 60.6% 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 33 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.26 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 38% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 7% 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 | 47.0%CMS range 34.8–63.3 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.7%CMS range 6.3–14.2 | 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 | 60.6% | 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 | 45.5% | 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 | 48.5% | 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 | 94.6% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 2.7% | 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 | 7.0%CMS range 3.7–14.8 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.85 | 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 75 beds and averages 71.4 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 4 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.44 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.80 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.77 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 3.04 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.60 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.97 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 31% is below 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 more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
40 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 28 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2026-03-17 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and document review the facility failed to provide supervision and care planned individualized interventions resulting in the risk for serious harm, injury impairment or death for 1 of 5 residents (R1) who was an elopement risk, was actively attempting to leave the facility, and succeeded with eloping on 3/7/26. R1 was located one hour and 20 minutes later, by the police, about 5 blocks from the facility. In addition, to R1 in immediate jeopardy, the facility failed to develop supervision and care planned individualized interventions with the potential for harm that is not immediate jeopardy for 3 of 3, residents (R3, R4, R5) reviewed for elopement risks. The immediate jeopardy began on 3/7/26 when the facility failure to provide adequate supervision resulted in R1's elopement and was identified on 3/13/26. The administrator and director of nursing were notified of the immediate jeopardy at 12:05 p.m. on 3/13/26. The immediate jeopardy was removed on 3/17/26, but noncompliance remained at 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.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2023-08-25 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to implement all suggested mitigation efforts based on Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) recommended guidelines to ensure prevention, and minimize the transmission of Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase (KPC) producing carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE). KPC producing CRE is a type of bacteria that can cause serious infections that can be hard to treat; most often spread person-to-person in healthcare settings specifically through contact with the infected or colonized people through contact with wounds or stool. The facility had seven residents with active KPC-producing CRE. The facility transferred three residents (R1, R2, R3) to acute care hospitals without informing the acute care hospital of the outbreak status as directed by MDH. In addition, the facility failed to ensure infection control precautions were adhered to for 4 of 7 residents (R4, R6, R9, R11) observed to have breeches 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 · F2026-03-17 · tag F0838 — failed to assess facility resources and resident needs — widespreadConduct and document a facility-wide assessment to determine what resources are necessary to care for residents competently during both day-to-day operations (including nights and weekends) and emergencies.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on interview and document review the facility failed to ensure the facility assessment included the required components of a plan for recruitment and retention of staff. This had the opportunity to affect all 71 residents.Findings include: Review of the facility assessment, dated 12/17/25, failed to include a plan to maximize recruitment and retention of direct care staff. It also lacked a contingency plan for events that did not require activation of the facility's emergency plan, but had the potential to affect resident care, such as availability of direct care nurse staffing or other resources for resident care. On 3/13/26 at 3:32 p.m., the administrator stated they had a plan to recruit staff; however, it was not included in the facility assessment document. She stated the facility assessment did not include a plan for staff retention or a plan to address direct care staffing outside of the facility's emergency plan. A policy regarding the facility assessment was requested but not received.
- Potential for harm · D2025-11-20 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and document review the facility failed to timely report an allegation of physical abuse to the state agency (SA) for 1 of 3 residents (R1) reviewed for abusefindings includeR1's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated she was independent with all activities of daily living. R1's undated admission Record identified R1 admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnosis included fracture of vertebrae, diabetes, depression and hypertension.R1's care plan dated 11/14/25, identified an alteration in mobility and staff were to assist with transfers and bed mobility. R1's Associated Clinic of Psychology (ACP) visit note dated 11/13/25, indicated a visit was requested due to an increase in confusion and falls. R1 expressed concern for how a staff person moved her around the previous day and spoke of people being in her bed with her. Staff was consulted after session to report psychotic symptoms and clients care concern. The visit note indicated R1's appearance was unkempt, lying in bed 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 · Dcited before2025-11-20 · 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 interview and document review the facility failed to provide evidence of ongoing clinical assessments following a fall for 1 of 3 residents (R1) reviewed for falls. Findings include:R1's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated she was independent with all activities of daily living and required supervision to walk 50 feet.R1's undated admission Record indicated R1 admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnosis included fracture of vertebrae, diabetes, depression and hypertension.R1's care plan dated 11/14/25, identified a risk for falls and included the following interventions: use of a concave mattress, signs in room to remind R1 to call for assistance and use of a reacher. The care plan identified an alteration in mobility and staff to assist with transfers and bed mobility. R1's Progress Notes identified the following:11/11/25, Writer was conducting routine rounds and heard someone calling for help. When writer approached R1's room, she was found seated on the floor. Bruising 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 · Fcited before2025-04-30 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure soiled facility linens were handled in a manner that prevented potential contamination during the laundry process. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all 65 residents served by the facility laundry. Findings include During an observation and interview on 4/29/25 at 10:09 a.m., with laundry assistant (LA)-A, three towels and a shower curtain were observed not in a bag and laying in the bin located below the laundry chute. LA-A stated some laundry would come down the chute not bagged. During an interview on 4/29/25 at 10:15 a.m., environmental director (ED) confirmed the above findings and indicated soiled linens were to be placed into the bag before sending down the laundry chute. ED stated it could cause contamination and soil the laundry chute. During an interview on 4/29/25 at 4:15 p.m., infection preventionist (IP) stated all soiled linens should be bagged before going down the chute. LA-B further stated soiled linens could contaminate the chute and someone could be exposed to 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 · E2025-04-30 · 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 observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure food was served at a palatable and appetizing temperature for 2 of 2 residents (R 11, and R35) who resided on the second floor reviewed for food. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all 24 residents residing on this unit. Findings include: R11's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R11 had intact cognition and was able to feed herself after staff set up her tray. R35's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R35 had moderate cognitive impairment and was able to feed herself after staff set up her tray. During an interview on 4/28/25 at 1:28 p.m., family member (FM)-A stated R35 usually ate her meals in her room and the food was usually cold by the time it was delivered. During an interview on 4/28/25 at 1:42 p.m., R11 stated she ate in her room and the hot food was not hot and the cold food was not cold by the time the tray was delivered. During an observation 4/28/25 at 6:08…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-04-30 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure food items in community refrigerators were properly labeled and dated in 2 of 3 refrigerators where resident's personal food was stored. In addition, the facility failed to ensure food temperatures were maintained according to acceptable standards on 1 of 3 steam tables, and failed to maintain sanitary conditions during food prep. REFRIGERATORS During an observation on 4/28/25 at 12:52 p.m., the fourth floor refrigerator contained an undated and unlabeled plastic bag, 1/2 plastic pitcher with orange liquid, with no date, and a container of ice cream dated 3/4. The bag contained a Tupperware container. Dietary Manager (DM) verified the containers were for resident consumption and should have been dated. DM stated the juice should have been dated when it was placed in the refrigerator. During an observation on 4/28/25 at 12:54 p.m., the third floor dining room refrigerator contained an unlabeled, undated container of cooked pasta. The Dietary Manager verified the container was unlabeled and undated.…
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 · D2025-04-30 · 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 observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to follow standards of practice related to medication administration of an inhalation medication for 1 of 3 residents (R26) observed for medication administration. Findings include: R26's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R26 was cognitively impaired and had diagnoses which included dementia, anxiety and asthma. Identified R26 required extensive assistance with bed mobility, transfers, toileting and personal hygiene. R26's care plan revised 12/11/23, identified R26 had an activity of daily living (ADL) self-care performance deficit related to weakness. R5's care plan interventions included dependence on staff for bathing, dressing, and personal hygiene. Directed staff to administer medications as ordered. R26's Order Summary Report dated 3/13/25, directed staff to administer Budesonide inhalation suspension 0/5 MG/2 ML via nebulizer twice daily for asthma. During an observation on 4/28/25 at 5:10 p.m., registered…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-30 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure staff were following fall risk interventions implemented for 1 of 3 (R41) residents identified at risk for falls. Findings include: R41's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], identified R41 had moderate impaired cognition and had diagnoses which included diabetes mellitus and depression. Indicated R41 required extensive assistance from staff with toileting, transfers, and personal hygiene. R41's care area assessment (CAA) dated 1/14/25, triggered for a risk of falls due to balance problems, use of anti-depression medications and a history of falls. R41's care plan dated 2/17/25, identified R41 was at risk for falls and required assistance from staff with mobility and transfers. R41's care plan indicated the call light should have been within reach. The care plan identified R41 was to have bed in lowest position, mat on floor, door open when in room, call do not fall sign posted, staff were to check on R41 and offered 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 · D2025-04-30 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to implement a system to ensure medications were available to administer as ordered for 1 of 1 residents (R7) reviewed for medication administration. Findings Include: R7's significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], identified R7 was cognitively intact and had diagnoses which included: asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder (COPD) (breathing difficulty) and diabetes mellitus. R7 was dependent on staff for dressing and toileting. R7's care plan dated 4/17/25, identified R7 was at risk for decreased cognation and physical abilities related to diagnosis of COPD and asthma. Review of physician orders placed on 4/17/25, revealed the following order placed: Anoro Ellipta (medication used for COPD) 62.5-25 micrograms (mcg) aerosol powder on puff daily. Review of R7's eMAR dated 4/25, revealed the following: -Umeclidinium Bromide Inhalation Aerosol Powder Breath Activated 62.5 MCG/ACT (Umeclidinium Bromide) 1 puff inhale orally one time 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 · D2025-02-26 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to update the provider of a medication refusal of Lovenox (medication used to prevent blood clots following surgery) for 1 of 3 residents (R2) reviewed for medication administration. Findings include: R2's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R2 was cognitively intact, had a surgical wound, and required non-surgical dressings. R2's diagnoses list printed 2/25/25, included fistula of intestine. R2's hospital discharge orders dated 2/5/25, indicated enoxaparin (Lovenox) (anticoagulation therapy-used to prevent blood clotting after surgery) 40 milligrams (mg)/0.4 milliliters (ml) injection, inject 0.4 ml daily subcutaneously (subq) (under the skin). R2's orders dated 2/5/25, indicated enoxaparin sodium solution 40 mg/0.4 ml, inject 40 mg subcutaneously one time a day for prevent[ion] blood clotting, to start 2/6/25. R2's February 2025 Medication Administration Record (MAR) indicated R2 refused Lovenox injections 2/6/25 through 2/8/25…
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.
Show the remaining 28 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-26 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, observation, and document review the facility failed to provide wound care as ordered for 1 of 3 residents (R2) reviewed for wound care. Additionally, the facility failed to ensure R2's care plan indicated wound care and pouch changes for the fistula. Findings include: R2's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R2 was cognitively intact, had a surgical wound, and required non-surgical dressings. R2's diagnoses list printed 2/25/25, included fistula of intestine. R2's hospital discharge orders dated 2/5/25, indicated the following: Wound care management 1. Remove pouch with adhesive spray. 2. Cleanse surrounding skin with Vashe [wound cleaner]and pat dry. 3. Use 3M Advanced Care Wand to raw skin. Let dry one minute. 4. Offer Lidocaine spray (prevents pain caused by some procedures). 5. Measure and cut out opening of Convatec Eakin Fistula Manager ( (square) or Coloplast Post op pouch 18681/18691 (round)- (pouches designed to protect skin and contain drainage from wounds 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 before2025-02-26 · 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 interview, observation, and document review the facility failed to conduct appropriate hand hygiene during wound care for 1 of 3 residents (R2) reviewed for wound care. Findings include: R2's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R2 was cognitively intact, had a surgical wound, and required non-surgical dressings. R2's diagnoses list printed 2/25/25, included fistula of intestine. On 2/26/25 at 11:04 a.m., R2's wound care was observed. Licensed practical nurse (LPN)-A washed his hands with soap and water prior to performing wound care. LPN-A donned gloves, opened R2's fistula collection bag that contained stool, removed a soiled dressing saturated with stool from inside bag, placed the soiled dressing in the garbage, and drained the bag into a plastic receptacle to measure R2's stool output. LPN-A doffed his gloves, and donned clean gloves. LPN-A did not perform hand hygiene between glove changes. LPN-A used a Sani wipe to clean stool from R2's legs, discarded the Sani wipe in 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 before2024-10-02 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure 1 of 1 residents (R1) reviewed for skin alterations had weekly skin observations completed, in addition to informing the interdisciplinary team of R1's skin breakdown. Findings include: R1's quarterly minimum data set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R1 had peripheral vascular disease, diabetes with neuropathy (lack of sensation caused by nerve damage) and was cognitively intact. The MDS further indicated R1 was dependent for toileting, hygiene, and required maximum assistance by 2 staff for mobility and transfers. R1's Care Plan dated 7/08/24, indicated R1 had the potential for alteration in skin integrity. Staff were to monitor skin integrity daily during cares and perform weekly skin inspections and provide treatment to open areas per physician order. R1's Risk vs Benefits form dated 8/12/24, indicated staff were to ensure pressure offloading and position changing and incontinence care occurred related to the concern for 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 · Fcited before2024-07-28 · 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, interview, and document review, the facility failed to ensure 1 of 3 ice dispensing machines were clean and free of excess mineral build up and cleaned on a regular schedule. This had potential to affect all residents of the nursing home, staff, and visitors who consumed food from the main production kitchen and/or ice and water from the fourth floor dining room ice machine. Findings include: During observation on 7/25/24 at 9:28 a.m., the fourth floor dining room ice and water dispenser had white, speckled, crust residue on the inside of the dispenser chutes, the drip tray, and other surfaces. During interview on 7/25/24 at 11:27 a.m., maintenance director (DOM) stated the third floor water and ice dispenser in the dining room was out of commission, and they worked on the fourth floor water and ice machine last night because the light came on which indicated it was time to complete maintenance, so DOM ordered the chemical cleaners and sanitizer to complete the cleaning. DOM stated the facility's system reminded them every month or every other month to check if…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-28 · 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, interview, and document review, the facility failed to ensure timely assistance with incontinence care when requested to promote dignity for 1 of 1 residents (R41) reviewed for dignity. Findings include: R41's quarterly Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE], indicated R41 was cognitively intact, had diagnoses of kidney failure, anxiety, and depression, was frequently incontinent of urine and bowel, and fully dependent on staff for toileting needs. R41 was able to understand and was easily understood. R41's Urinary Incontinence and Indwelling Catheter Care Area Assessment (CAA) dated 3/18/24, identified R41 as incontinent of bowel and bladder, dependent on staff for toileting, did not transfer to the toilet, and wore a brief on check and change due to mobility. R41 was at risk for skin breakdown. R41's care plan dated 4/11/24, included R41 was incontinent of bladder, used disposable briefs, and instructed staff to offer R41 assistance to check and change upon rising, before and after meals, 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 · D2024-07-28 · 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 observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to comprehensively re-assess for ability or safety, document resident education regarding risks, and care plan the self-administration of medications for 1 of 1 resident (R41) known to obtain their own medication from outside sources, who was observed to have such medications at bedside. Findings include: R41's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], included R41 was cognitively intact, had diagnoses of dysphasia (difficulty swallowing), malnutrition, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, depression, and anxiety, and required set-up or clean-up for eating. R41's care plan dated 4/10/24, included R41 completed a risk/benefit form due to their desire to continue and inappropriate diet and unwillingness to elevate the head of the bed to prevent aspiration. A care plan intervention dated 12/6/22, indicated R41 required assistance to eat but refused. R41's MHM Self Adminsitration of Medication Evaluation dated 10/2/23, indicated R41…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-07-28 · 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 Based on observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to comprehensively assess and monitor non-pressure related skin conditions for 1 of 2 residents (R40) reviewed for skin concerns, and failed to monitor resident weights for 1 of 1 residents (R40) reviewed who took a diuretic and had a history of weight fluctuations. Findings include: R40's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], identified R40 was cognitively impaired, had a diagnoses of alcohol use disorder, depression, and cellulitis, was incontinent of bowel and bladder, and required supervision for walking and toileting. R40's hospital discharge note dated 6/11/24, identified R40 was admitted to the hospital through the emergency department on 5/31/24, with severe dehydration, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, shortness of breath, low blood pressure and high heart rate. Their weight at hospital admission on [DATE] was approximately 188.5 pounds. R40's hospital nutrition assessment date 6/5/24, included R40 weighed approximately 188.5…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-07-28 · tag F0685 — isolatedAssist a resident in gaining access to vision and hearing services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews and document review, the facility failed to ensure that residents received proper follow-up recommendation for hearing assistive devices to maintain hearing abilities for 1 of 1 residents (R12) reviewed for hearing services. Findings include: R12's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated she had intact cognition, had no rejections of care or rejections of evaluation of care, and had diagnoses of Alzheimer's dementia, anxiety, and high blood pressure. R12's Care Area Assessment (CAA) for communication dated 7/21/23, identified R12 appeared hard of hearing but did not wear hearing aids. The CAA indicated R12 was at risk for mixed messages. A hearing and vision assessment dated [DATE], identified R12 had adequate hearing and did not wear hearing aids. R12's care plan lacked documentation of communication needs. An audiology (hearing) provider progress note dated 2/12/24, identified an order for a medical consult to obtain medical clearance for hearing aids. 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 · Fcited before2024-01-31 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to ensure refrigerated food items were disposed of after expiration date and were properly stored, labeled, and dated when the original packaging was opened. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all 70 residents who resided in the facility. Findings include: Upon observation on 1/30/24 at 10:22 a.m. the refrigerator in the facility's main kitchen. The following items were expired and still in the refrigerator: -one gallon size container of potato salad with a manufacture use by date of 12/8/23, -one opened half-gallon of buttermilk with a manufacture use by date of 12/23/23. - A block of cream cheese in a cardboard box with the inner foil torn. Approximately 1/3 of the cream cheese had been used and mold was found covering the cheese where the inner foil had been opened, the manufacture use by date was 11/4/23. The following items were opened without any dates: -Three one-gallon size salad dressings - One plastic container…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-01-31 · tag F0813 — patternHave a policy regarding use and storage of foods brought to residents by family and other visitors.
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, the facility failed to ensure the food a residents brought in from the outside was dated and labeled the transitional care unit. This had the potential to affect all 20 residents who resided on that floor. In addition, the facility was unable to provide documentation that the residents communal refrigerator temperatures were being monitored. Findings include: Upon observation on 1/30/24 at 12:46 p.m. the resident floor refrigerator was found to have six plastic grocery bags that were tied bags with deli-style boxes of food inside, none of these bags were labeled with a name or a date. There was a bag of rotisserie chicken in the manufacturers bag that stated keep frozen in the refrigerator with thawed meat unlabeled with a name or date. There was a package of opened half-eaten [NAME] jack cheese slices with no name, it had a use by date of 10/12/23. In addition, there was an opened jar of salsa with mold inside with a use by date of 9/21/22. The refrigerator…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-01-31 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to provide personal hygiene to 3 of 4 residents (R2, R6, and R7) dependent on staff for activities of daily living (ADL's). The residents did not receive timely showers or weekly skin assessments. Findings include: R2's care plan dated 8/9/22 indicated R2 required the assistance of one staff member to assist with bathing. The care plan did not indicate how often bathing was to be performed. R2's physician order sheet dated 5/22/23 indicated R2 was to receive a weekly shower. 1. Ensure shower/bath was completed, chart refusals. 2. Complete weekly skin inspection. 3. Nurse to ensure aide trims fingernails and toenails. 4. Notify supervisor or nurse manager of any skin alterations. R2's weekly skin inspection reports reviewed from 11/1/23 - 1/31/24 indicated R2 received weekly skin inspections on 11/9/23, 11/27/23, and 1/15/24. R2's nursing progress notes reviewed from 11/1/23 - 1/31/24 did not indicate R2 had refused any weekly showers or…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-01-31 · 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 interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure 2 of 4 residents (R6 and R7) received daily weights as ordered to monitor for heart failure and unexplained weight loss. Findings include: R6's admission MDS dated [DATE] indicated R6 had a BIMs score of 15 indicating he was cognitively intact. R6's MDS did not indicate how R6 was to bathe or shower. R6's pertinent diagnoses were left femur (thigh bone) fracture and chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia (low level of oxygen in the body). R6 physician order dated 1/26/24 indicate R7's parameters for Lasix 20 milligram (mg) by mouth everyday prn (as needed); give medication if patient has gained 2 lbs. in 1 day or 5 lbs. in 1 week for significant leg edema; diagnosis diastolic heart failure. R6's Weight summary dated 1/18/24 - 1/31/24 indicated: -1/28/24 his weight was 153.4 and on 1/31/24 his weight was 146.8 lbs. R6's progress notes dated 1/13/24 - 1/31/24 indicated: -1/18/24 at 6:00 a.m. R6 refused to be weighed, stating is so early, do…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-01-31 · 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, interview, and document review the facility failed to maintain a medical record that was accurately documented for 1 of 1 resident (R1), when Registered Nurse (RN)-A documented a completed treatment that had not been completed. Findings include: R1's quarter Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated R1 had a Brief Inventory of Mental Status (BIMs) score of 15 indicating R1 was cognitively intact. R1 was dependent with toileting, showering, and lower body dressing requiring two staff members. R1 required maximum assistance with rolling in bed and hygiene. R1's diagnoses were calculus in bladder (bladder stones), moderate protein calorie deficiency and chronic pain. R1's physician order sheet dated 12/5/23 indicated wound care to left great toe every a.m. shift. 1. Clean wound with moist 4x4 gauze. 2. Paint wound with iodine swab. 3. Cover with gauze and tape. R1's electronic treatment administration record printed 1/31/24 at 11:34 indicated registered nurse (RN)-A had completed the wound…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2023-11-30 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Policy titled Infection Prevention and Control- Contact Precautions dated 7/31/23 identifies contact precautions are intended to prevent transmission of the infectious agents, including epidemiologically important microorganisms, spread by direct or indirect contact with the resident or the residents environment. In addition to Standard Precautions, Contact Precautions will be used to prevent the healthcare acquired spread of organisms that can be transmitted by direct or indirect resident contact (hand or skin-toskin contact that occurs when performing resident care) or by indirect contact (touching) with environmental surfaces of contained resident care equipment. Contact Precautions may be considered for residents who have: 1. Infections (including Multi-Drug Resistant Organisms (MDROs)) 3. Uncontained wound drainage from an infected wound 5. Other epidemiologically significant organisms as determined by the facility's infection preventionist (IP) and the Medical Director. Healthcare personnel caring 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 · D2023-06-08 · 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
Based on interview and document review the facility failed to thoroughly investigate potential drug diversion for 1 of 1 resident (R418) reviewed for misappropriation of resident property. Findings include: R418's significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) 12/2/22, indicated R418 had severe cognitive impairment with delusional thinking and hallucinations and diagnoses of respiratory failure and dementia with behavioral disturbances. Furthermore, R418's MDS indicated R418 required assistance of one for transfer and ambulation in room and was on hospice. R418's hospice pharmacy delivery slip dated 12/30/22, at 4:53 p.m. indicated 120 oxycodone 10 milligram (mg) tablets (narcotic pain medication), 60 lorazepam 1 mg tablets (anti-anxiety medication), quetiapine 25 mg tablets (antipsychotic medication) and budesonide nebulizer (medication to help with breathing) had been delivered. R418's progress note dated 12/31/22 at 3:09 p.m., indicated R418 was found taking medication in his room. Two medication cards of oxycodone, 2 cards of lorazepam, quetiapine and some nebulizers were removed…
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 · D2023-06-08 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
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, the facility failed to ensure that baseline care plans were developed and implemented within 48 hours of admission for one (R367) resident reviewed for care plans. Findings include: During an observation on 6/5/23 at 10:05 a.m., R367 was laying in her bed sleeping with meal tray on bedside table. R367 with a vacuum assisted closure of wound (wound vac) involving a special dressing connected to a pump that gently draws fluid and infection from a wound using negative pressure. This was attached to R367's left foot. Review of R367's clinical record revealed R367 admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A baseline care plan downloaded at 6/5/23 at 11:34 a.m., showed the only focus of care as Potential alteration in nutrition r/t wt loss, therapeutic diet, wound which was initiated on 6/2/23. A baseline care plan containing the minimum healthcare information necessary to provide proper care such as initial goals, physician orders, therapy services, and social services for R367 was not…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-06-08 · 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, interview, and document review the facility failed to ensure a comprehensive and individualized care plan was developed and implemented for 1 of 1 resident (R27) reviewed for dialysis. Findings include: R27's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R27 was cognitively intact. R27's diagnoses included nephritic syndrome with diffuse mesangiocapillary glomerulonephritis (an injury resulting in inflammation in the kidneys) end stage renal (kidney) disease with dependency on renal dialysis, and unspecified nephritic syndrome with morphologic changes (resulting in inflammation in the kidneys). R27's Treatment Details Report dated 5/31/23, indicated R27's dialysis access was a central venous catheter (CVC). R27's care plan dated 5/3/23, indicated R27 received kidney dialysis related to renal failure. Interventions included not drawing blood or taking a blood pressure from the arm with a graft although R27 did not have a graft. R27's care plan also lacked indication R27's dialysis…
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 before2023-06-08 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and document review the facility failed to ensure provider order was present for treatment of a non-pressure related wound care for 1 of 1 (R367) reviewed for wound vac. Findings include: R367 was admitted to facility on 6/1/23. Diagnosis listed on Interagency Assessment & Transfer Form dated 6/1/23 at 12:18 p.m., include wound of left foot, wound dehiscence, sepsis, diabetic infection of left foot, osteomyelitis of ankle and foot, diabetes. The transfer form indicated Wound Therapy as, Wound VAC #1 Left Foot (involving a special dressing connected to a pump that gently draws fluid and infection from a wound using negative pressure) with placement date of 5/22/23. R367's Interagency Transfer Orders printed on 6/1/23 at 10:54 a.m., state Wound care Comments: Wound care instructions: wound vac set at 125mmHg of continuous suction Change three times weekly by skilled nursing. Pad the tubing appropriately off of the skin. Secure with Gauze, kerlix, ace wrap. R367's nursing progress…
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 before2023-06-08 · tag F0685 — isolatedAssist a resident in gaining access to vision and hearing services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to ensure assistive devices to maintain hearing abilities and vision were provided for 1 of 1 resident (R34) reviewed for hearing and vision devices. Findings include: R419's significant change minimum data set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated resident was cognitively intact. R419's care plan dated 2/10/23, indicated resident had impaired visual function and wore glasses as desired. A patient encounter note from a doctor of optometry (OD) dated 1/31/2023 indicated, With significant refractive differences between eyes, patient is having difficulty with vision. Recommended sataract surgery of the left eye or a new pair of glasses. During observation and interview on 6/5/23 at 9:57 a.m., R419 wore glasses. R419 stated they wanted their cataracts taken care of and offered to pay full price or would pay for new glasses. During an interview on 6/7/23 at 9:19 a.m., R419 confirmed they had spoken with the facility to check in on the cataract surgery.…
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 · D2023-06-08 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to implement a physical therapy (PT) ordered restorative nursing program to prevent potential decrease in range of motion (ROM) for 2 of 3 residents (R19,R57) reviewed for restorative nursing programs. Findings include: R57's significant change Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE], indicated R57 had adequate hearing and clear speech and could usually understand and be understood by others, however lacked documentation of a cognitive assessment. It included diagnoses of stroke with paralysis on one side of his body requiring extensive assistance of two staff for bed mobility, transfers, and toilet use, and he had limited ROM in both upper and lower extremities on one side (left). In addition, he did not have therapy services nor were restorative nursing programs performed in the preceding seven days. R57's Activities of Daily Living (ADL), Cognition, and ADL Functional/Rehabilitation Potential care area assessments were not triggered. R57's 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 · Dcited before2023-06-08 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and document review the facility failed to consistently implement identified interventions to reduce the risk of falls for 1 of 1 residents (R57) reviewed for falls. R57's significant change Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE], indicated R57 had adequate hearing and clear speech and could usually understand and be understood by others, however lacked documentation of a cognitive assessment or fall history on admission and inditated he had not falled since admission. It included diagnoses of stroke with paralysis and limited range of motion on one side of his body (left) requiring extensive assistance of two staff for bed mobility, transfers, and toilet use. R57 was frequently incontinent of bowel and not on a toileting program. R57's falls Care Area Assessment (CAA) dated 5/15/23, included he was at risk for falls due to a history of stroke, impaired balance/mobility, and cognition, and identified he was mostly bed bound, required a mechanical lift for transfers, and included staff…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-06-08 · 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, interview, and document review, the facility failed to comprehensive assess, and create and implement interventions for ongoing, undesired weight loss for 1 of 1 resident (R12) reviewed for significant weight loss. Findings include: R12's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R12 had mild cognitive deficits and was independent for eating and did not have a swallowing disorder. R12's diagnoses included, Alzheimer's disease, muscle weakness, dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), muscle wasting. R12's Care Area Assessment (CAA) dated 1/25/23, indicated R12 triggered for activities of daily living (ADLs), psychosocial well-being, mood, falls, nutrition, pressure ulcers, and psychotropic drug use. R12's care plan dated 12/31/22, indicated R12 had a nutritional or potential nutritional problem related to a mechanical soft diet, weight loss and the progression of dementia and that weight loss comfort care was ordered. Interventions indicated to allow choices at mealtime, menu…
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 · D2023-06-08 · 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 document review, the facility failed to provide alternatives prior to installing a bed rail on the bed, assess the resident for risk of entrapment, and to review risks and benefits of bed rails with the resident or their representative and obtain informed consent for 1 of 1 residents (R46) reviewed who had rails on their beds. Findings include: R46's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated he was cognitively intact, required extensive assist of two staff for bed mobility, transfer, and toilet use, and had diagnoses of diabetes and vascular disease (a disease which causes narrowing of the blood vessels). The MDS indicated bed rails were not used. R46's care plan updated 5/29/23, did not include the use of bilateral bedrails. During observation and interview on 6/5/23 at 9:44 a.m., R46 was lying in bed with the head of the bed elevated, and one-half sized bedrails affixed to each side of the upper half of the bed. R46 stated he used them to help him turn over.…
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 · D2023-06-08 · tag F0791 — failed to provide routine dental services — isolatedProvide or obtain dental services 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 observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to ensure dental needs were comprehensively assessed and appropriately acted upon (i.e., referred to a dental provider) for 1 of 1 resident (R23) reviewed who voiced dental concerns. Findings include: R23's face sheet dated 6/8/23, indicated diagnoses of dysphagia. Payer information listed primary payer as Medicaid. R23's significant change Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE], indicated no concerns with oral/dental status. Broken or loosely fitting full or partial denture an no natural teeth was not selected. Exam notes from Health Drive Dental Group with exam date of 3/23/22, indicated R23 lost lower denture and upper denture had an ill fit. The Doctor of Dental Surgery recommended new dentures or modify upper denture by a reline. Pt would like to eat better and have a smile again. During observation and interview on 6/5/23 at 11:40 a.m., R23 did not have visible natural teeth nor dentures in. R23 stated they would like dentures and had 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 · D2023-06-08 · tag F0825 — isolatedProvide or get specialized rehabilitative services as required for a 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 interview and document review, the facility failed to provide rehabilitative services as ordered for 1 of 2 residents (R57) reviewed for therapy services. Findings include: R57's significant change Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE], indicated R57 had adequate hearing and clear speech and could usually understand and be understood by others, however lacked documentation of a cognitive assessment. It included diagnoses of stroke with paralysis on one side of his body requiring extensive assistance of two staff for bed mobility, transfers, and toilet use, and he had limited range of motion (ROM) in both upper and lower extremities on one (left) side. In addition, he did not have therapy services in the preceding seven days. R57's Activities of Daily Living (ADL), Cognition, and ADL Functional/Rehabilitation Potential care area assessments were not triggered. R57's care plan dated 4/3/23, directed staff to follow physical therapy (PT) and occupational therapy (OT) instructions for functional mobility. R57's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-06-08 · 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
Based on observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure proper enhanced barrier precautions were adhered to for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for transmission-based precautions. This had the potential to affect all staff and all 60 residents residing in the facility. Findings include: On 3/29/22, R31 had a positive culture for Klebsiella Pneumoniae, a carbapenem resistant bacteria classified as a multi-drug resistant organism (MDRO) that is highly contagious through contact with human secretions. After the positive culture, the facility placed R31 on enhanced barrier precautions. Enhanced barrier precautions guided staff to don gowns and gloves before coming into contact with their skin or potentially contaminated articles such as bedding or personal items. During observation on 6/5/23 at 2:37 p.m., R31 was sitting in their room on a shower chair. Nursing assistant (NA)-A was in the resident room with gloves but without a gown changing the residents bed linens. A sign was taped to R31's door that indicated R31 was to be on enhanced barrier precautions and all…
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 · D2023-06-08 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure 2 of 5 residents (R59, R56) were offered or received the pneumococcal vaccine in accordance with the Center for Disease Control (CDC) recommendations. Findings include: The CDC's Pneumococcal Vaccine Timing for Adults dated 3/15/23, identified: -adults 65 years or older who had not previously received a PCV13, PCV15, or PCV20, or had not previously received any pneumococcal vaccine, one dose of PCV20 (pneumococcal conjugate vaccines) should be administered. -adults aged 19-64 years with certain underlying medical conditions (including heart failure) whose previous vaccination history was unknown should receive one dose PCV20. R59's face sheet undated, identified he was [AGE] years old and admitted on [DATE]. R59 had a diagnosis of heart failure and had no allergies to vaccines or contraindications to vaccines listed. R59's medical record lacked evidence a vaccination history was obtained, or a pneumococcal vaccination was offered or received.…
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 · C2026-03-17 · tag F0729 — widespreadVerify that a nurse aide has been trained; and if they haven't worked as a nurse aide for 2 years, receive retraining.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and document review the facility failed to ensure competency evaluation on the Minnesota Nursing Assistant Register for 1 of 1 nursing assistants (NA)-A) reviewed for registry verification. This had the potential to affect all 71 residents at the facility.Findings include: On 3/12/26 at 11:46 a.m., (nursing assistant) NA-A stated it was her first shift at the facility. The facility schedule, dated 3/12/26, indicated NA-A was assigned to work the day shift on the third floor, for 7.5 hours. The facility resident list indicated 26 residents were living on the third floor and a total of 71 residents in the facility, as of 3/12/26. The Minnesota Nurse Aide Registry Search, dated 3/13/26 at 11:45 a.m., provided by the facility, indicated NA-A was inactive since 12/7/24. On 3/12/26 at 3:30 p.m., the director of nursing (DON) stated she trusted the staffing agency sent them only staff on the registry. Further, she stated the facility did not verify an active status for agency staff. On 3/12/26 at 3:32 p.m., the administrator stated their process did not include verifying…
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
$104,974 in federal fines across 2 penalties. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.
- $89,050 — penalty dated 2026-03-17
- $15,924 — penalty dated 2023-08-25
- Medicare payment denial — starting 2023-09-20 for 7 days
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 MONARCH HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT — 45 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 | 2.2 | -1.2 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 1 of 5 | 2.1 | -1.1 vs chain |
| Staffing | 4 of 5 | 3.7 | +0.3 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 2 of 5 | 3.0 | -1.0 vs chain |
The other 44 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.2★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 44; 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 | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MONARCH HEALTHCARE OPERATING XII LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 01/01/2023 |
| NIJ LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 01/01/2023 |
| SPARTAN HEALTHCARE LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 01/01/2023 |
| WBS HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 01/01/2023 |
| YAZOMA HOLDINGS, LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 01/01/2023 |
| HALPERT, MARC | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 01/01/2023 |
| JAFFA, NOAM | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE DIRECTOR | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 01/01/2023 |
| LEGUM, JOSHUA | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEE | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 01/01/2023 |
| STERN, WILLIAM | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 01/01/2023 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 14 rows in the source record cover these 9 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
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 $894K 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 MN
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 Minnesota 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 245417. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-04-30, 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.