Hillside Heights Rehabilitation Center
1201 McLean Blvd., Eugene, OR 97405 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 83 certified beds · (541) 683-2155 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (43) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 3 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 3 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 | 5.1% | 14.9% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 5.0% | 4.7% | 5.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 1.4% | 1.4% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.2% | 2.0% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 5.2% | 4.9% | 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% | 2.4% | 3.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 6.8% | 20.6% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 21.6% | 12.4% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 95.2% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 9.7% | 5.8% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 12.3% | 21.8% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 7.0% | 13.9% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.5% | 1.4% | 1.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 81.1% | 81.2% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 24.3% | 21.4% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 17.4% | 16.1% | 12.0% | worse |
§ 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.
45.7% 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 38 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 80.0% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 20 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 0.24 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 32% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 5% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. 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 | 45.7%CMS range 34.1–60.3 | 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 | 10.8%CMS range 6.8–16.2 | 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 | 80.0% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 60.0% | 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 | 85.0% | 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 | 88.9% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 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 | 0.0% | 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| 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 83 beds and averages 56.9 residents a day — about 69% occupied, or roughly 26 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.74 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.50 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.05 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 4.12 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.00 on weekdays — 17% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.55 to 0.35 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 52% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
43 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 33 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-08 · 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
Based on interview, and record review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure ongoing assessments were conducted for non-pressure skin wounds for 1 of 3 sampled residents (#4) reviewed for non-pressure skin wounds. This placed residents at risk for worsening wounds. Findings include: A review of the facility's Skin and Wound Management Guidelines indicated the following skin changes required assessment, measurement, photography, and documentation in the Skin and Wound Module:-Neuropathic ulcer (nerve related sore).-Infected skin tear, regardless of size.-All vascular-related wounds (wounds due to blood vessels), venous or arterial. Resident 4 was admitted to the facility in 11/2025 with diagnoses including open wound of left great toe and diabetes with polyneuropathy (a condition where many nerves in the body are damaged, causing numbness, weakness, or pain in the hands and feet). The 11/20/25, admission MDS indicated Resident 4 was cognitively intact and had a diabetic foot ulcer. A Wound Clinic Note dated 11/20/25 indicated Resident 4 had a blister that was incised (cut…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-08 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, it was determined the facility failed to provide adequate catheter care for 1 of 3 sampled residents (#1) reviewed for catheter care. This placed residents at risk for unmet catheter needs. Resident 1 was admitted to the facility in 12/2025 with diagnoses including obstructive and reflux uropathy (disease of the urinary system caused by blockage and backward urine flow). The 1/2026 TAR indicated for staff to change the suprapubic catheter every 30 days. On 1/12/26 the TAR indicated to hold the treatment and referred the reader to Administration Notes. A 1/12/26 Administration Note indicated the suprapubic catheter was not changed because staff were waiting for pending special instructions from the in-house provider because of a penile implant (device surgically inserted into the penis). There was no documented evidence that Resident 1 received a suprapubic catheter change in 1/2026. Resident 1's 2/2026 TAR indicated for staff to change the suprapubic catheter every 30 days. On 2/11/26 the TAR indicated the catheter was changed by Staff 10 (LPN).…
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 before2026-01-30 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure proper labeling of biologicals for 2 of 3 treatment carts reviewed for medication storage and failed to ensure treatment carts were properly secured during a random observation. This placed residents at risk for reduced efficacy of medication and unauthorized access to medications. Findings include:1. On 1/28/26 observations were made from 11:21 AM to 11:31 AM of the treatment cart on the west hall near the nurses' station, it was left unlocked and unattended.On 1/28/26 at 11:31 AM Staff 8 (LPN) acknowledged the treatment cart was left unlocked and unattended and contained insulin and other treatments.2. On 1/28/26 at 11:34 AM on open insulin glargine pen was observed in the west hall treatment cart with no open date.On 1/28/26 at 11:34 AM Staff 8 (LPN) acknowledged the insulin pen was open and not labeled with an open date.3. On 1/28/26 at 12:54 PM one open Tresiba insulin pen was observed in the east hall treatment cart with no open date.On 1/28/26 at 12:54 PM Staff 7 (RN)…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-30 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to follow the facility bowel protocol and administer medication as ordered for 2 of 5 sampled residents (#s 5 and 8) reviewed for medication. This placed residents at risk for constipation. Findings include:The undated bowel protocol indicated residents without a bowel movement in excess of three days would be assessed by the nurse, including a physical assessment of the gastro-intestinal (GI) system, signs and symptoms of constipation, impaction, or obstruction, and complete a resident and/or staff interview. When needed, a bowel protocol would be implemented as established by physician orders including administration of stool softeners, administration of laxatives or bowel stimulants, and administration of an enema. If after completion of the bowel protocol orders, the resident did not have a bowel movement, the physician would be notified. 1. Resident 5 admitted to the facility in 12/2025 with diagnoses including diabetes. A review of the bowel records from 12/31/25 through 1/28/26 indicated the resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-30 · 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
Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents' narcotic drug records were in order and an account of all controlled drugs was maintained for 2 of 3 medication carts reviewed for medication storage. This placed residents at risk for inaccurate clinical records related to narcotics and drug diversion. Findings include:1. On 1/28/26 at 8:38 AM the west hall Controlled Substance Book was reviewed with Staff 8 (LPN). There was only one signature observed for the 1/28/26 day shift controlled medication count. Staff 8 immediately signed the book and stated he completed the count earlier that morning with another staff, but did not sign the book.On 1/30/26 at 11:39 AM Staff 2 (DNS) stated the expectation was for two staff to count controlled medications between shifts, compare them to the Controlled Substance Book and each sign the signature page after the count was completed.2. On 1/28/26 at 9:23 AM Staff 7 (RN) was observed to administer oxycodone (controlled medication) to Resident 19. Staff 7 signed out the oxycodone from 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 · D2026-01-30 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents were free from unnecessary medications for 1 of 5 sampled residents (#5) reviewed for medication. This placed residents at risk for adverse drug events. Findings include:Resident 5 admitted to the facility in 12/2025 with diagnoses including atrial fibrillation.The 12/19/25 physician order indicated Resident 5 was to receive digoxin (antiarrhythmic) 250 mcg once daily.The manufacturer recommendations indicated to monitor the heart rate for one full minute before administration and notify the health care provider if the heart rate was less than 60 beats per minute or any significant changes in rate, rhythm or quality of the pulse.There was no indication in the clinical record that staff monitored Resident 5's heart rate each time before administering digoxin.On 1/29/26 at 12:45 PM Staff 7 (RN) stated she held the medication if the pulse was below 60 beats per minute, but did not always check the pulse before administering digoxin. Staff 7 stated if the CNAs recently checked the pulse and it was recorded 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 · D2026-01-30 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to maintain a medication error rate of less than 5%. There were 2 errors in 27 opportunities resulting in a 7% error rate. This placed residents at risk for adverse medication side effects. Findings include:Resident 46 admitted to the facility in 2019 with diagnoses including atrial fibrillation.The 1/22/26 physician order indicated Resident 46 was to receive the following:-Lasix every Monday, Wednesday and Friday for lower extremity edema;-Lactulose once daily for increased ammonia levels.On 1/28/26 at 8:42 AM Staff 7 (RN) was observed to administer morning medications to Resident 46. The medications administered did not include Lasix or Lactulose.On 1/28/26 at 8:54 AM Staff 7 acknowledged Resident 46 did not receive Lasix and Lactulose as ordered because the medications were not available.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-30 · tag F0791 — failed to provide routine dental services — isolatedProvide or obtain dental services for each resident.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to provide dental services for 1 of 3 sampled residents (#7) reviewed for dental services. This placed residents at risk for unmet dental needs. Findings include:Resident 7 admitted to the facility in 2023 with diagnoses including heart failure.The 11/6/25 progress note indicated Resident 7 had poor dentition.The 11/26/25 Care Conference indicated Resident 7 was interested in having a dental appointment. On 1/26/26 at 1:59 PM Resident 7 stated she/he had dental problems and requested to see the dentist at the last care conference several months ago but staff did not follow up on the request. There was no information in the clinical record to indicate a follow up was completed for Resident 7's request to see the dentist.On 1/29/26 at 2:13 PM Staff 2 (DNS) acknowledged Resident 7 indicated she/he wanted to see the dentist at the 11/26/25 care conference and a dental appointment was not set up for the resident.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-30 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure medical records were accurate for 1 of 5 sampled residents (#5) reviewed for medication. This placed residents at risk for medication errors. Findings include: Resident 5 admitted to the facility in 12/2025 with diagnoses including atrial fibrillation.The 12/19/25 physician order indicated Resident 5 was to receive digoxin 250 mcg once daily.The 12/2025 and 1/2026 MARs indicated Resident 5 was to receive digoxin 250 mg from 12/20/25 through 12/31/25 and from 1/1/26 through 1/8/26.On 1/29/26 at 1:15 PM Staff 2 (DNS) stated there was a transcription error when digoxin was entered into the MARs and acknowledged the MARs indicated the resident was to receive digoxin 250 mg when the order was for digoxin 250 mcg.
- Potential for harm · D2025-12-05 · 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 record review, it was determined the facility failed to investigate a potential case of abuse and investigate a fall in a timely manner for 2 of 4 sampled residents (#103 and 113) reviewed for accidents and abuse. This placed residents at risk for abuse and neglect. Findings include:1 Resident 103 was admitted to the facility in 5/2024 with diagnoses including unsteadiness on feet, and traumatic brain injury.An Unwitnessed Fall investigation revealed on 5/28/24 at 8:27 PM, Resident 103 sustained a fall while attempting to go outside the facility. The report indicated the investigation was completed on 6/10/24.On 11/5/25 at 11:33 AM Staff 2 (DNS) stated investigations are expected to be completed by staff within five days.2. Resident 113 was admitted to the facility in 11/2024 with diagnoses including stroke and anxiety.A 11/8/24 hospital History and Physical report revealed Resident 113 was a poor historian and mostly responded with, I do not remember.A 11/14/24 SLUMS (St. Louis University Mental Status Examination - a test that checks memory, language 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.
Show the remaining 33 citations
- Potential for harm · D2025-12-05 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to maintain a safe environment free from accident hazards for 1 of 3 sampled residents (#103) reviewed for accidents. This placed residents at risk for injury. Findings include:Resident 103 was admitted to the facility in 5/2024 with diagnoses including unsteadiness on feet and traumatic brain injury.A baseline care plan initiated on 5/20/24 indicated Resident 103 experienced two falls on 5/20/24. Interventions included a PT consultation for strength and mobility, one on one activities if bed bound, and monitoring for bruising, changes in mental status, confusion, and sleepiness.An Unwitnessed Fall investigation dated 5/21/24 revealed at 3:11 AM, Resident 103 rolled out of bed onto the floor. The brakes on both beds in the resident's room were not functioning properly. The incident was considered avoidable due to the bed malfunction.On 11/3/25 at 9:05 AM, Staff 18 (Maintenance Director) stated the bed brakes were checked monthly in the facility. Staff 18 confirmed there was no documentation to verify 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 · D2025-12-05 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to provide assistance with eating as care planned for 1 of 3 resident (#112) reviewed for hydration. This placed residents at risk for unmet needs. Findings include:Resident 112 was admitted to the facility in 2/2025 with diagnoses including dysphagia and dementia. A 10/3/25 Quarterly MDS indicated Resident 112 required supervision or touch assistance with eating. A revised care plan dated 9/3/25 revealed Resident 112 had an ADL self-care performance deficit and was dependent on staff to eat. Resident 112 fed herself/himself some of the time but was not consistent and required assistance. In a continuous observation on 11/3/25 at 12:31 PM Resident 112 was observed sitting up in bed with a food tray in front of her/him. He was unable to answer questions, and no staff were observed in room. At 12:45 PM Staff 6 (CNA) was observed walking by Resident 112's room and did not check on Resident 112. At 12:47 PM Staff 6 went into Resident 112's room and asked if she/he was all done and Resident 112…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-12-05 · tag F0770 — failed to provide lab services — isolatedProvide timely, quality laboratory services/tests to meet the needs of residents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to process physician laboratory orders timely for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#113) reviewed for abuse. This placed residents at risk for untreated medical needs. Findings include:Resident 113 was admitted to the facility in 11/2024 with diagnoses including stroke and anxiety.A 12/13/24 physician order instructed staff to obtain a sexually transmitted infection (STI) risk panel laboratory test. A 12/14/24 risk panel report indicated no test was specified on the requisition (official request form) for the specimen. The report requested the test code and corresponding test name for the specimen received. The STI increased risk panel required an Aptima swab (A device designed for the collection of samples from various specimen sites to detect infections.) The word URGENT appeared in large letters across the page.A 12/16/24 Encounter Note written by Staff 32 (Former Doctor of Nursing Practice) revealed Resident 113 had foul smelling vaginal discharge and the STI test was denied by the lab. UTI testing was positive,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-08-30 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — widespreadEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure a system was in place to honor resident food preferences for 4 of 4 sampled residents (#s 17, 19, 21, and 37) reviewed for dietary needs. This placed residents at risk for unmet nutritional needs and lessened quality of life. 1. Resident 17 was admitted to the facility in 2016 with diagnoses including diabetes. On 8/27/24 at 10:36 AM Resident 17 stated she/he was not given a menu to select her/his preferred meals. On 8/29/24 at 10:38 AM Staff 22 (CNA) stated about one month ago the facility stopped providing residents with a menu to choose between the main or alternate meal. Staff 22 stated several residents, including Resident 17, were upset about this as their opportunity to make a choice was taken away. On 8/29/24 at 2:00 PM Staff 18 (Dietitian) stated the facility recently changed the menu system from providing menus to residents each day to providing menus once per week on Fridays. On 8/30/24 at 9:54 AM Resident 17 stated she/he did not receive a weekly menu on Fridays. On 8/30/24…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-08-30 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview it was determined the facility failed to ensure the kitchen was cleaned, failed to ensure food was stored appropriately and discarded in a timely manner, and failed to monitor refrigerator temperatures for 1 of 1 kitchen and 1 of 2 refrigerators reviewed for sanitary conditions. This placed residents at risk for foodborne illness. Findings include: 1. On 8/26/24 at 9:29 AM during the initial tour of the kitchen the following was observed: a. Walk-in refrigerator: -A plastic container with pickle spears, opened and undated. -A cardboard box containing bananas that were dark brown in color. -A stick of margarine, open to air and undated. -Food crumbs, brown splatters, and various small debris on the floor throughout the walk-in refrigerator. b. Walk-in freezer: -A bag of frozen tapioca hot dog buns with a manufacture expiration of 12/22/22. -A bag of frozen chicken strips, opened to air and undated. -A bag of frozen hamburger patties, opened to air and undated. -A bag of frozen veggie vegan patties, opened to air and undated. -A zip lock gallon bag…
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 · E2024-08-30 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure a resident rooms were in good repair and free of odors for 5 of 5 sampled residents (#s 6, 19, 27, 32 and 33) reviewed for environment. This placed residents at risk for lack of a homelike environment. Findings include: 1. On 8/26/24 at 1:33 PM the following observation was made: Resident 19's air conditioner unit made a loud, high pitch squeak. On 8/30/24 at 10:59 AM Staff 1 (Administrator) and Staff 9 (Maintenance Director) acknowledged the identified environment issue. 2. On 8/27/24 at 9:17 AM the following observation was made: Resident 6's light in the bathroom was burned out. On 8/30/24 at 10:31 AM Staff 20 (Nursing Assistant) stated Resident 6's bathroom light had been burned out for about one week. Staff 20 stated he reported the light and it had not been fixed. On 8/30/24 at 10:59 AM Staff 1 (Administrator) and Staff 9 (Maintenance Director) acknowledged the identified environment issue. 3. On 8/26/24 at 10:57 AM the following observation was made: Resident 27's head of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-08-30 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — patternEnsure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure Staff 13 (LPN) had the appropriate competencies and skills for infection control during CBG checks and administration of insulin. This placed residents at risk for bloodborne illness and reduced efficacy of medications. Findings include: a. On 8/29/24 at 12:17 PM Staff 13 (LPN) was observed to obtain a CBG for Resident 24. Staff 13 exited the room and placed the glucometer in the east hall treatment cart without cleaning it. On 8/29/24 from 12:17 PM to 12:40 PM continuous observations were made. Staff 13 passed medication and administered insulin to multiple residents. Staff 13 did not clean the glucometer during the observations. On 8/29/24 at 12:40 PM Staff 13 stated Resident 24 was the last CBG check she had to complete prior to lunch. Staff 13 stated she cleaned the glucometers at the beginning and end of shift with purple wipes. Staff 13 further stated she worked at the facility for one month and this was her first nursing job. Staff 13 stated she was trained for about three weeks…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-08-30 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — patternHave a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure an RN was available for at least eight consecutive hours per day for 3 of 31 days reviewed for RN coverage. This placed residents at risk for delayed nursing assessments. Findings include: A review of the Direct Care Staff Daily Reports from 7/26/24 through 8/25/24 revealed the following dates with no RN coverage: -8/20/24 -8/21/24 -8/22/24 On 8/29/24 at 10:38 AM Staff 1 (Administrator) acknowledged the lack of RN coverage on the identified dates.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-08-30 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure proper storage temperatures were maintained for 1 of 2 medication storage refrigerators, and proper labeling of biologicals and securing of treatment carts for 1 of 3 treatment carts reviewed for medication storage. This placed residents at risk for reduced efficacy of medication and unauthorized access to medications. Findings include: 1. The 8/2024 east hall medication refrigerator temperature logs indicated the temperatures exceeded 46 degrees F on multiple occasions and the temperatures were as high as 73 degrees on 8/21/24. On 8/30/24 at 12:00 PM the medication refrigerator on the East Hall was observed with Staff 2 (DNS) and contained flu vaccines and insulin. On 8/30/24 at 12:00 PM Staff 2 (DNS) stated the medication refrigerator on the east hall contained flu vaccines and insulin and the temperatures were to be kept between 36 degrees F and 46 degrees F. Staff 2 acknowledged the 8/2024 temperature logs indicated the east hall medication refrigerator exceeded 46 degrees F on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-30 · tag F0552 — isolatedEnsure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to provide risk and benefit information for a psychotropic medication for 1 of 5 sampled residents (#37) reviewed for unnecessary medications. This placed the residents at risk for lack of ability to make informed decisions about their care. Findings include: Resident 37 admitted to the facility in 7/2022 with diagnoses including depression, anxiety, and insomnia. The 1/24/24 physician order indicated Resident 37 received Trazodone (antidepressant) for insomnia. Review of Resident 37's medical record revealed no indication the risks and benefits of the medication was reviewed with the resident. On 8/27/24 at 12:05 PM Resident 37 stated she/he received Trazodone for sleep, depression, and anxiety. Resident 37 stated she/he did not recall going over the risks and benefits of the medication with facility staff or signing a consent for the medication. On 8/29/24 at 1:21 PM Staff 3 (LPN-Unit Manager)) acknowledged there was no evidence to indicate the risk and benefits for Trazodone were reviewed with Resident 37.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-30 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to obtain information related to advance directives and health care decisions for 3 of 4 sampled residents (#s 17, 34 and 37) reviewed for advance directives. This placed residents at risk for not having their health care decisions honored. Findings include: 1. Resident 17 was admitted to the facility in 7/2016 with diagnoses including depression. A review of Resident 17's clinical record revealed no evidence the resident was provided with information on the right to formulate an advance directive. On 8/29/24 at 1:40 PM Staff 7 (Director of Social Services) confirmed Resident 17 was not provided information on formulating an advance directive. 2. Resident 34 admitted to the facility in 6/2024 with diagnoses diabetes. Review of Resident 34's medical record indicated no documentation an advance directive was offered or reviewed with the resident or her/his family. On 8/29/24 at 1:42 PM Staff 7 (Director of Social Services) stated he was unable to recall or provide documentation of an advance directive being…
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 · D2024-08-30 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure oxygen was administered as ordered and failed to ensure residents' respiratory equipment was maintained for 2 of 2 sampled residents (#s 6 and 10) reviewed for respiratory care, ADLs and dialysis. This placed residents at risk for respiratory concerns. Findings include: 1. Resident 6 was admitted to the facility in 2018 with diagnoses including chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia (an absence of enough oxygen in the tissues to sustain bodily functions). The 10/13/23 Annual MDS indicated Resident 6 was cognitively intact. Resident 6's physician order dated 7/12/24 revealed the oxygen concentrator filter was to be changed weekly. The 8/2024 TAR indicated the external filters were changed weekly and it was last completed on 8/25/24. On 8/27/24 at 9:17 AM the external filters on the oxygen concentrator were observed to have a layer of dust. Resident 6 stated she/he used the oxygen concentrator nightly. On 8/29/24 at 11:11 AM Staff 16 (Med Tech) stated the evening nurse was to clean…
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 before2024-08-30 · 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 record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure the community use CBG glucometer was properly cleaned and sanitized between resident uses for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#24) reviewed during CBG checks. This placed all residents who required CBG checks at risk for bloodborne illness. Findings include: The facility's undated Glucometer Cleaning Competency Check indicated glucometers were to be cleaned with bleach wipes after each use. On 8/29/24 at 12:17 PM Staff 13 (LPN) was observed to obtain a CBG for Resident 24 on the East Hall. Staff 13 exited the room and placed the glucometer in the East Hall treatment cart without cleaning it. On 8/29/24 from 12:17 PM to 12:40 PM continuous observations were made. Staff 13 passed medication and administered insulin to multiple residents. Staff 13 did not clean the glucometer during the observations. On 8/29/24 at 12:40 PM Staff 13 stated Resident 24 was the last CBG check she had to complete prior to lunch. Staff 13 stated she cleaned the glucometers at the beginning and end of shift with purple…
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 · D2024-08-30 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — isolatedKeep all essential equipment working safely.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview it was determined the facility failed to maintain essential kitchen equipment in safe operating condition for 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for kitchen services. Findings include: On 8/26/24 at 9:34 AM an observation of the walk-in refrigerator in the kitchen revealed a missing door handle to exit the refrigerator. On 8/26/24 at 9:53 AM Staff 19 (Dietary) stated the door handle fell off and Staff 19 was not sure where it went. On 8/26/24 at 10:04 AM Staff 17 (Dietary Manager) acknowledged the door handle fell off and needed to be repaired. On 8/28/24 at 11:30 AM during a follow up visit to the kitchen the walk-in refrigerator door handle was still missing. On 8/30/24 at 10:45 AM Staff 8 (Dietitian) stated the staff needed to find the door handle and screw it in.
- Potential for harm · D2023-12-07 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to notify the resident's family after a change of condition and transfer to a local hospital for 1 of 3 sampled residents (#23) reviewed for change of condition. This placed residents at risk for lack of notification. Findings include: Resident 23 was admitted to the facility in 6/2023 with diagnosis including diabetes. Review of a progress note dated 6/9/23 at 9:01 PM revealed the resident was alert and oriented, delayed responses, possible right upper extremity drift, right lip droop, dizziness and was fidgety. The note indicated the resident was sent to a local hospital for possible transient ischemic attack (mini stroke). Review of a progress note dated 6/10/23 at 1:32 AM revealed the resident returned to the facility with diagnoses of hyponatremia (low sodium) and fatigue. No documentation was found the resident's representative was notified of the transfer to the hospital. In an interview on 12/1/23 at 9:47 AM Witness 1 (Complainant) indicated the facility did not notify the resident's family of a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-12-07 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Bassed on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to provide ADL care for 1 of 8 (#13) sampled residents reviewed for ADLs. This placed other residents at risk for lack of daily care. Findings include: Resident 13 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis including leg and clavicle fractures. Resident 13's care plan revealed she/he was dependent on one person for assistance with bathing/showering. On 2/21/23, Witness 15 (Complainant) stated Resident 13 reported she/he did not receive a shower or bath while at the facilty, which was 21 days. Shower and bath logs reviewed for 2/2023 revealed no showers or baths were given to the resident during her/his stay at the facility. On 12/6/23 at 10:00 AM, Staff 2 (DNS) acknowledged these findings.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2023-03-24 · 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 record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure the kitchen was cleaned and standard food safety practices were followed for 1 of 1 kitchen. This placed residents at risk for food borne illnesses. Findings include: 1. On 3/20/23 at 10:54 AM the kitchen was toured and the following was observed: -Shelves containing spices and random small cooking tools were unfinished and had a greasy brown film on the surface. The ceiling around the spice area had brown splatters. -Drips of brown debris were located along the edge of the steam table. -The back splash of the grill had large splashes of thick brown and black streaks. -The inside of the microwave contained splatters of food debris and the microwave door had metal that was chipped. -The counters around the microwave and work area had areas of both dust and food particles. -The white air vent above the steam table was covered with black streaks with dust hanging off the vents. -The doorway entrance of the walk-in refrigerator had exposed plaster and the corner molding of the wall 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 · Ecited before2023-03-24 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — patternProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to follow physicians' orders and care plan interventions for 5 of 16 sampled residents (#s 7, 21, 25, 38 and 44) reviewed for edema, medications, constipation/diarrhea, ADLs and accidents. This placed residents at risk for unmet needs. Finding include: 1. Resident 21 was admitted to the facility in 2022 with diagnoses including stroke. A care plan intervention dated 11/8/22 instructed staff to ensure Resident 21's left upper arm was in a sling and propped on pillows when up in the wheelchair. A care plan revision dated 1/11/23 instructed staff to keep Resident 21's left arm in a sling and supported at all times. On 3/23/23 at 10:07 AM Resident 21 was asked about her/his sling and stated she/he was supposed to wear it but did not know where it was and it was lost. On 3/23/23 at 3:11 PM Staff 31 (RN Unit Manager) was asked about Resident 21's sling. Staff 31 agreed Resident 21 was to wear the sling at all times, he did not know why the sling was not on, and would follow up with therapy and update…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-03-24 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — patternHave a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure RN coverage for eight consecutive hours in a 24-hour period for 17 out of 29 days reviewed for staffing. This placed residents at risk for unassessed needs and lack of care. Findings include: A review of the Direct Care Staff Daily Reports dated 2/20/23 through 3/20/23 revealed no RN coverage for 17 out of 29 days reviewed. On 3/24/23 at 9:11 AM Staff 1 (Administrator) and Staff 2 (DNS) stated the facility continued to work to find RN coverage for the facility.
- Potential for harm · E2023-03-24 · tag F0730 — patternObserve each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure the required annual training and annual performance reviews were completed for 4 of 4 sampled CNA staff (#s 15, 25, 28 and 29) reviewed for staffing. This placed residents at risk for unmet needs. Findings include: On 3/23/23 at 9:22 AM Staff 15 (CNA) stated he worked at the facility for a year. Staff 15 stated he did not remember receiving any training about abuse. On 3/23/23 staff start dates, annual performance reviews and annual trainings were requested for Staff 15, Staff 25 (CNA), Staff 28 (CNA) and Staff 29 (CNA). No documentation was received for staff start dates, performance reviews, or annual trainings. On 3/24/23 at 9:16 AM Staff 1 (Administrator) and Staff 2 (DNS) stated the facility changed ownership and there was difficulty obtaining documentation for staff trainings.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-03-24 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to follow transmission based precautions for aerosol generating procedures for 1 of 4 halls (East Hall) reviewed for infection control and failed to follow infection control standards for 2 of 4 halls (South and West) reviewed for infection control. This placed residents at risk for exposure and contraction of infectious diseases. Findings include: 1. On 3/22/23 at 9:51 AM room [ROOM NUMBER] had a sign which indicated droplet precautions were in place due to an aerosol generating procedure and facility staff were to wear an N95 mask, gown, gloves and eye protection when in the room from 9:26 AM through 11:26 AM. Staff 25 (CNA) put on a gown and gloves and entered room [ROOM NUMBER]. On 3/22/23 at 9:54 AM Staff 25 confirmed he did not wear an N95 mask or eye protection in room [ROOM NUMBER] and stated he was unaware of the additional precautions. On 3/24/23 at 8:36 AM room [ROOM NUMBER] had a sign which indicated droplet…
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 · D2023-03-24 · tag F0582 — isolatedGive residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to provide written notification to 2 of 3 sampled residents (#s 303 and 304) reviewed for beneficiary notification. This placed residents at risk for unknown financial liabilities. Findings include: 1. Resident 303 was admitted to the facility with Medicare Part A services in 8/2022. The resident's last covered day of Part A services was 9/2/22. A review of Resident 303's medical record revealed no evidence an Advanced Beneficiary Notice of Non-Coverage was issued. On 3/22/23 at 11:15 AM Staff 27 (Business Office Manager) stated Resident 303 remained in the facility after Medicare Part A services ended and was not issued an Advanced Beneficiary Notice of Non-Coverage. 2. Resident 304 was admitted to the facility with Medicare Part A services in 11/2022. The resident's last covered day of Part A services was on 12/11/22. A review of Resident 304's medical record revealed no evidence an Advanced Beneficiary Notice of Non-Coverage was issued. On 3/22/23 at 11:15 AM Staff 27 (Business Office Manager) stated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-03-24 · tag F0636 — isolatedAssess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to comprehensively assess 1 of 2 sampled residents (# 3) reviewed for positioning and mobility. This placed residents at risk for lack of proper care and services. Findings include: Resident 3 was admitted to the facility in 2022 with diagnoses including right-sided paralysis following a stroke. A 3/12/22 Hospital Progress Note revealed Resident 3 had a right hand contracture (a condition of shortening or hardening of muscles, tendons or other tissues). A 3/21/22 admission MDS revealed Resident 3 was documented as having no upper extremity range of motion impairment. A 12/22/22 Quarterly MDS revealed Resident 3 was documented as having no upper extremity range of motion impairment. An ADL care plan revised 8/8/22 revealed no care plan related to range of motion impairment. On 3/20/23 at 4:23 PM Resident 3 stated she/he had a contracture of her/his right hand from years ago. On 3/23/23 at 11:45 AM Resident 3's right hand was observed to be closed in a fist with a soft tube held in the palm of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-03-24 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to accurately assess 1 of 1 sampled resident (#s 12) reviewed for privacy. This placed residents at risk for lack of proper care and services. Findings include: Resident 12 was admitted to the facility in 2014 with diagnoses including cellulitis (bacterial skin infection) and diabetes. A 9/2/22 Encounter Note from the physician indicated the plan was to provide a suppressive (long-term) dose of Keflex (antibiotic medication) was to be administered to Resident 12 twice daily for three months. A 12/3/22 hospital Discharge Orders Report indicated Resident 12's Keflex was discontinued. The 1/26/23 Quarterly MDS indicated Resident 12 received antibiotics during the previous seven days. The 1/2023 MAR indicated no antibiotic medications were provided to Resident 12 during that month. On 3/23/23 at 3:01 PM Staff 2 (DNS) confirmed the Quarterly MDS for Resident 12 was inaccurate.
- Potential for harm · D2023-03-24 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for 1 of 5 sampled residents (#34) reviewed for medications. This placed residents at risk for unmet needs. Findings include: Resident 34 admitted to the facility in 2023 with diagnoses of cognitive deficit and PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder). A 1/5/23 Hospital Discharge Summary revealed Resident 34 had a MoCA score (dementia assessment) of 24/30 indicating mild congitve impairment and PTSD. A 1/5/23 care plan revealed Resident 34 was not care planned for cognitive impairment or PTSD. On 3/23/23 at 11:23 AM Staff 16 (Social Service Assistant) stated she completed a PTSD evaluation for Resident 34 and was unaware the PTSD care plan did not automatically trigger from the evaluation. On 3/23/23 at 3:14 PM Staff 9 (Activity Director/Former Social Service Director) confirmed Resident 34 was expected to be care planned for cognitive deficit and PTSD.
- Potential for harm · D2023-03-24 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to revise care plans for 3 of 5 sampled residents (#s 24, 28 and 38) reviewed for ADLs, nutrition and accidents. This placed residents at risk for unmet needs. Findings include: 1. Resident 24 was admitted to the facility in 2022 with diagnoses including prostate problems and urinary retention. An admission MDS dated [DATE] identified Resident 24: - Had no behaviors, - required extensive assistance (weight bearing) for bed mobility, - limited assistance (non-weight bearing, hands on, guided movements) for transfers, - was independent for eating, - needed limited assistance for toileting, - had no chewing or swallowing problems and no or unknown weight loss or gain. A care plan developed at the time of admission and revised identified: - Behaviors problems revised 10/8/22 for verbal aggression and threatening to staff and others, - limited assistance for bed mobility, - extensive assistance for transfers revised 3/13/23, - set up tray for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-03-24 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure dependent residents received required assistance with ADLs for 2 of 6 sampled residents (#s 14 and 44) reviewed for ADLs. This placed resident at risk for unmet needs. Findings include: 1. Resident 14 was admitted to the facility in 2015 with diagnoses including stroke and dementia. A public complaint was received on 12/10/21 indicating Resident 14 was not bathed for over a month. The 11/2021 and 12/2021 DSRs (Documentation Survey Report) revealed Resident 14 did not receive any type of bathing from 11/1/21 through 11/8/21 (eight days), 11/11/21 through 11/22/21 (11 days), 11/24/21 through 12/18/21 (25 days) and 12/20/21 through 12/31/21 (12 days). The 2/2023 and 3/2023 DSRs revealed the following: -Resident 14 did not receive any type of bathing from 2/4/23 through 2/9/23 (six days) 2/11/23 through 2/23/23 (13 days), 2/25/23 through 3/20/23 (24 days). -From 3/1/23 through 3/23/23 Resident 14 did not receive personal hygiene four instances on day shift and seven instances on evening…
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 · D2023-03-24 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to accurately assess, identify and provide treatment to wounds for 2 of 2 sampled residents (#s 4 and 28) reviewed for pressure ulcers. This place residents at risk for unmet wound care needs. Findings include: 1. Resident 4 was admitted to the facility in 2022 with diagnoses including heart failure and an ankle fracture. An 10/15/22 Hospital History and Physical identified Resident 4 broke her/his ankle and required surgery. An Operative Report dated 10/15/22 indicated Resident 4's ankle incisions were dressed, a sugar tong (U shaped device used to stabilize a injury) splint was placed and the foot and ankle were wrapped with elastic wrap. The 10/20/22 admission Database (nursing assessment) noted Resident 4 had an ankle fracture, an ADL deficit with no impairments or devices, the resident was non-weight bearing, right and left pedal pulses (ankle and foot) were palpable (felt), normal and the incision could not be…
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 · D2023-03-24 · tag F0687 — failed to care for feet properly — isolatedProvide appropriate foot care.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure appropriate foot care was provided for 1 of 6 sampled residents (#14) reviewed for ADLs. This placed residents at risk for unmet foot care needs. Findings include: Resident 14 was admitted to the facility in 2015 with diagnoses including diabetes. A public complaint was received on 12/10/21 indicating Resident 14's toenails were long. A review of 12/2021, 1/2022 and 2/2022 TARs and physician orders revealed no nail care was provided to Resident 14. Physician orders dated 1/13/23 instructed staff to provide nail care weekly on Fridays. On 3/22/23 at 11:39 AM Witness 1 (Complainant) stated in 12/2021 Resident 14's toenails were long and she/he had a lot of dead skin built up on her/his feet and in between her/his toes. On 3/20/23 at 11:03 AM Resident 14 stated her/his toenails did not get trimmed regularly and at times her/his toenails got caught on the blanket because they were so long. On 3/22/23 at 11:25 AM Resident 14's toenails were observed with Staff 25 (CNA). Resident 14'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 · D2023-03-24 · 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
Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to providerange of motionservices and care for contractures for 3 of 7 sampled residents (#s 3, 7 and 9) reviewed for ROM and ADLs. This placed residents at risk for ROM decline. Findings include: 1. Resident 9 was admitted to the facility in 9/2022 with diagnoses including stroke and adult failure to thrive. An 10/11/22 revised care plan indicated Resident 9 required extensive assist of one staff to transfer to the toilet and stand-by assistance with a front-wheel walker for ambulation (ability to walk from place to place with or without an assistive devise). A 1/20/23 Physical Therapy Discharge Summary indicated Resident 9 ambulated 75 feet with stand-by assist, use of a four-wheel walker, and bed mobility and transfers were supervised assist. The 2/2023 Documented Survey Report indicated Resident 9 walked in the corridor three times with assistance, but otherwise the activity did not occur. Resident 9 was totally dependent on others for assistance with toileting for six days. On 3/20/23 at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-03-24 · tag F0699 — isolatedProvide care or services that was trauma informed and/or culturally competent.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure a resident who was a trauma survivor received trauma-informed care for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#44) reviewed for behavioral needs. This placed residents at risk for unmet trauma needs and a decrease in their quality of life. Findings include: Resident 44 was admitted to the facility in 2022 with diagnoses including stroke, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, bipolar disorder and cognitive communication deficit. A 12/1/22 admission MDS revealed Resident 44's BIMS score was 14 which indicated she/he was cognitively intact. Resident 14 had little interest or pleasure in doing things, felt down, depressed, or hopeless, had trouble with sleep, felt tired or had no energy, had eating difficulties, felt bad about herself/himself, trouble concentrating and moving and spoke slowly. A review of Resident 44's 12/8/22 care plan revealed four areas which discussed trauma. All areas listed a history of trauma with lists of different examples but did not describe Resident 44's history of trauma.…
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 · D2023-03-24 · tag F0740 — failed to provide behavioral / mental-health care — isolatedEnsure each resident must receive and the facility must provide necessary behavioral health care and services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, it was determined the facility failed to complete a person-centered care plan, provide ongoing behavioral health needs and timely address mood symptoms for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#44) reviewed for behavioral needs. This placed residents at risk for unmet behavioral health needs and decrease in their quality of life. Findings include: Resident 44 was admitted to the facility in 2022 with diagnoses including stroke, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, bipolar disorder and cognitive communication deficit. A 12/1/22 admission MDS revealed Resident 44's BIMS score was 14 which indicated she/he was cognitively intact. Resident 14 had little interest or pleasure in doing things, felt down, depressed, or hopeless, had trouble with sleep, felt tired or had no energy, eating difficulties, felt bad about herself/himself, trouble concentrating and moving and spoke slowly. A review of Resident 44's 12/8/22 care plan revealed four areas which discussed trauma. All areas listed a history of trauma with lists of different…
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 · D2023-03-24 · tag F0745 — failed to provide medically-related social services — isolatedProvide medically-related social services to help each resident achieve the highest possible quality of life.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to provide medically related social services to attain or maintain the highest practicable mental and psychosocial well-being for 1 of 1 resident (#44) reviewed for behavioral and emotional needs. This placed residents at risk for unmet needs. Findings include: Resident 44 was admitted to the facility in 2022, with diagnoses including stroke, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, bipolar disorder and cognitive communication deficit. A 12/1/22 admission MDS revealed Resident 44's BIMS score was 14 which indicated she/he was cognitively intact. Resident 14 had little interest or pleasure in doing things, felt down, depressed, or hopeless, had trouble with sleep, felt tired or had no energy, had eating difficulties, felt bad about herself/himself, had trouble concentrating and moved and spoke slowly. A review of Resident 44's 12/8/22 care plan revealed four areas which discussed trauma. All areas listed a history of trauma with lists of different examples but did not describe Resident 44's history…
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
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to VOLARE HEALTH — 16 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 | 3 of 5 | 1.8 | +1.2 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 1.7 | +1.3 vs chain |
| Staffing | 4 of 5 | 2.4 | +1.6 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 3 of 5 | 3.2 | -0.2 vs chain |
The other 15 homes this chain runs (chain average 1.8★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PAC 12 OPCO HOLDCO LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 03/01/2023 |
| KNOX HEALTHCARE PAC 12 HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 03/01/2023 |
| PAC 12 HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 03/01/2023 |
| PAC 12 PINNACLE HOLDCO LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 03/01/2023 |
| HAGLER, ALEXANDER | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 03/01/2023 |
| KNOX, DONALD | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 03/01/2023 |
| COLLEGE HILL PROPCO LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/01/2023 |
| SMITH, BRIAN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/27/2023 |
| VOLARE HEALTH LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/01/2023 |
| DUNHAM, SARAH | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/01/2025 |
| HOHNSTEIN, PHILLIP | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/01/2023 |
| SCHWARTZ, ELIEZER | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/01/2023 |
| HAGAR, CHAIM | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/01/2023 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 24 rows in the source record cover these 13 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
6 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 $1.3M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 14% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in OR
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 Oregon 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 385046. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-30, 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.