Arlington Heights Health and Rehabilitation Center
4825 Wellesley Ave, Fort Worth, TX 76107 · For profit - Individual · 170 certified beds · (817) 732-6608 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- CMS has flagged it for abuse
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Sep 2025
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
- inspectors recorded 2 serious findings as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (43) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $31,539 in federal fines (most recent 2025-09-05)
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (92%) runs well above the national median (45%)
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 | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 of 5 |
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 fell from 3 to 1 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 15.1% | 15.8% | 15.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 0.9% | 3.0% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.7% | 0.3% | 0.9% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.3% | 0.8% | 2.0% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 4.3% | 2.4% | 6.5% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 2.3% | 3.3% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 13.7% | 14.0% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 11.8% | 18.0% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 99.1% | 98.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 4.8% | 3.8% | 4.7% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 23.1% | 13.4% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 9.7% | 9.6% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.5% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 85.0% | 88.0% | 79.4% | typical |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
44.2% 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 48 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.35 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 58% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 12% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 44.2%CMS range 33.6–56.0 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.2%CMS range 6.8–16.0 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 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 | 1.19 | 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 170 beds and averages 101.8 residents a day — about 60% occupied, or roughly 68 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 3.27 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.38 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.06 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.92 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.42 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.42 to 0.30 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 92% is well above the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
43 citations, most serious first. The 13 most serious are shown; the remaining 30 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2025-09-05 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident received adequate supervision and assistive devices to prevent accidents for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accidents. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1, who had dementia, was provided with adequate supervision to prevent her from eloping from the facility on 08/08/25. The resident was found half a block away from the facility. The noncompliance was identified as past noncompliance. The Immediate Jeopardy began on 08/08/25 and ended on 08/08/25. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the investigation began. This failure could place residents who require supervision at risk of harm, severe injury, and possible death. Findings included:Record review of Resident #1's admission Record, dated 09/04/25, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included cerebral infarction unspecified (when the blood supply to part of the brain…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Immediate jeopardy · Kcited before2025-02-15 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — patternProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from abuse for 3 of 10 residents (Residents #2, #3, and #4) reviewed for abuse, neglect, and exploitation. The facility failed to ensure Resident #2, #3, and #4 were free of abuse from Resident #1. Resident #1 hit Resident #2 and #3 with her doll in the face and head when she was upset and punched Resident #4 in the stomach after she approached her boyfriend. An Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) was identified on 02/11/25 at 3:47 PM. The IJ template was provided to the facility on 2/11/25 at 4:00 PM. While the IJ was removed on 02/13/25, the facility remained out of compliance at a scope of pattern and a severity level of potential for more than minimal harm due to the facility continuing to monitor the implementation and effectiveness of their Plan of Removal. This failure could place residents at risk of physical abuse from other residents. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's Quarterly MDS dated [DATE]…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2024-08-02 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure an environment that was free of accident hazards and that each resident received adequate supervision to prevent elopement for 1 (Resident #1) of 5 residents reviewed for quality of care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 was provided with adequate supervision and free of potential harm when he eloped from the facility on 07/30/2024 without staff knowledge. The facility was informed of the elopement by a family member who reported the resident was found 8 miles from the facility. The facility failed to ensure staff rounded often to ensure all Resident #1 was in the facility prior to leaving at the end of their shift or upon starting their shift on 07/30/2024. A past non-compliance Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) situation was identified on 08/02/2024 at 1:40 PM. The Immediate Jeopardy began on 07/30/2024 and ended on 07/31/2024. The facility had corrected the non-compliance before the surveyor began. These failures placed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-12-11 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — patternHave a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to use the service of a Registered Nurse (RN) for at least eight consecutive hours a day, seven days a week for 16 of 40 days (06/08/25, 07/05/2025, 07/06/25, 07/12/25, 07/19/25, 07/27/25, 08/09/25, 08/10/25, 08/31/25, 10/11/25, 10/12/25, 10/17/25, 10/18/25, 11/15/25, 12/06/25 and 12/07/25) reviewed during a look back period from 06/07/25 to 12/18/25 for weekend coverage. The facility failed to have RN coverage in the facility for eight consecutive hours on 06/08/25, 07/05/2025, 07/06/25, 07/12/25, 07/19/25, 07/27/25, 08/09/25, 08/10/25, 08/31/25, 10/11/25, 10/12/25, 10/17/25, 10/18/25, 11/15/25, 12/06/25 and 12/07/25.This failure could place residents at risk of not having their nursing and medical needs met and improper care.Findings included:Record review of the facility's Timecard Reports from 06/07/25 to 12/18/25 reflected the following:- Sunday 06/08/25: ADON D: Shift In 20:37 (8:37 PM)- Shift Out 23:13 (11:13 PM); 2 hours and 36 minutes worked RN G: Shift In 22:00 (10:00 PM)- Shift Out 6:55 AM (Monday); 2 hours worked…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-11 · tag F0645 — isolatedPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
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 interviews and record reviews the facility failed to ensure residents were screened for mental illness and coordinate with the State mental health authority the need for services for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #99) reviewed for PASARR screening. The facility failed to recognize that Resident #99's PL1 was inaccurate, which resulted in the resident not being referred to the local authority for a PE. The failure placed residents with mental illness at risk of not receiving services they were entitled to receive. Findings included:Record review of Resident #99's admission MDS, dated [DATE], reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of bipolar disorder. His BIMS score was 15, indicating he was cognitively intact. His Functional abilities assessment revealed he required substantial assistance with his ADLs. Record review of Resident #99's care plan, dated 12/14/25, reflected he had an ADL self-care deficit, he was on an anti-psychotic medication 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 before2025-12-11 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident that included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident medical, nursing, mental, and psychosocial needs for 2 of 20 residents (Residents #14 and #76) reviewed for care plans. 1. The facility failed to develop a care plan addressing Resident #14's nail care refusal.2. The facility failed to develop a care plan addressing Resident #76's right hand contracture. This failure could place residents at risk of receiving inadequate interventions not individualized to their care needs. Findings included:1. Record review of Resident #14's quarterly MDS reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old male who admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The residents' diagnoses included diabetes, seizure disorder, history of TIA (a temporary blockage of blood flow to the brain; mini stroke) and cerebral infarction (blockage of blood vessel in the brain cutting off…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-11 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident who was unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming and personal and oral hygiene for 1 of 20 residents (Resident #33) reviewed for ADLs. The facility failed to ensure Resident #33 received showers/bed baths as scheduled for the months of November 2025 and December 2025. These failures could place residents at risk of not receiving services or care, decreased quality of life, and decreased self-esteem.Findings included:Record review of Resident #33's annual MDS assessment, dated 10/05/25, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #33 had diagnoses of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (ongoing lung condition caused by damage to the lungs), depression (mood disorder that causes a persistent feeling of sadness and loss of interest), non-Alzheimer's Dementia (brain disorder caused by damage…
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 · D2025-12-11 · 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident with pressure ulcers received necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing, prevent infection and prevent new ulcers from developing for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #114) reviewed for pressure ulcer treatment.The facility failed to ensure Resident #114 received wound care for his pressure ulcers on the weekend of 12/06/25-12/07/25.This failure could place the residents at risk of Infection and worsening wounds.Findings included:Record review of Resident #114's admission MDS assessment, dated 12/05/25, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old male, who admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The residents' diagnoses included methicillin resistant staphylococcus aureus infection (a type of staph that can be resistant to several antibiotics). Resident #114 had severe cognitive impairment with a BIMS score of 2. The MDS indicated that Resident #114 had four Stage 3 pressure ulcers…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-11 · tag F0694 — isolatedProvide for the safe, appropriate administration of IV fluids for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure parenteral fluids were administered consistent with professional standards for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #116) reviewed for PICC lines.1. The facility failed to ensure the dressing on Resident #116's PICC line (used to deliver medications and other treatments directly to the large central veins near heart) was changed every seven days as ordered by the physician, which resulted in the resident's PICC line dressing not being changed on 12/06/25.2. LVN X failed to perform hand hygiene during medication administration through Resident #116's PICC line.The failures could affect residents by placing them at risk for infections and cross-contamination. Findings included: Record review of Resident #116's admission MDS assessment, dated 12/02/25, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #116 had a diagnosis of septicemia (an infection caused by large amounts of bacteria entering…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-11 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure parenteral fluids were administered consistent with professional standards of practice and in accordance with physician orders, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the resident's goal and preferences for 1 of 20 resident (Resident #116) reviewed for pharmacy services.The facility failed to ensure Resident #116's intravenous medication bag and tubing was labeled with date, time, and initials.These failures could place residents at risk for medication error, delay in medication administration and infection.Findings included:Record review of Resident #116's admission MDS assessment, dated 12/02/25, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to facility the on 11/29/25. Resident #116 had a diagnosis of septicemia (It is an infection caused by large amounts of bacteria entering the bloodstream). He had a BIMS score of 14, which indicated his cognition was intact. The MDS reflected that 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 · D2025-12-11 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure any drug regimen irregularities reported by the Pharmacist Consultant were acted upon, for 1 of 20 residents (Resident #33) whose medications were reviewed for gradual dose reduction. The facility's Pharmacy Consultant recommended the physician should consider a gradual dose reduction for Resident #33's Amitriptyline (used to treat depression) on 08/29/25. The facility failed to ensure this was communicated to the resident's primary care physician regarding the recommendation. This failure could place residents receiving medications at risk for adverse consequences and could cause a decline in their physical, mental, and psychosocial condition.Findings included:Record review of Resident #33's annual MDS assessment, dated 10/05/25, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #33 had a diagnosis of depression (mood disorder that causes a persistent feeling of sadness and loss…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-11 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain medical records on each resident that were complete in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices for 1 of 20 residents (Resident #10) whose clinical records were reviewed for accuracy. The Social Worker failed to document in Resident #10's clinical record when the resident's family/legal representative was invited to participate in the resident's quarterly care plan meetings.The failure placed residents at risk of not having their care and services accurately documented. Findings included:Record review of Resident #10's significant change in status MDS assessment, dated 10/11/25, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to facility the on 09/30/18. Resident #10 had a diagnosis of sequelae of cerebral infarction (long-term problems or consequences that linger long after a stroke), dysphasia (partial loss of language), gastrostomy status (a surgical opening into the stomach for nutritional support…
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 · D2025-12-11 · tag F0914 — isolatedProvide bedrooms that don't allow residents to see each other when privacy is needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure each bed had suspended ceiling curtains, which extend around the bed to provide total visual privacy in combination with adjacent walls and curtains for 3 of 21 residents (Residents #74, #95, and #99) reviewed for privacy curtains. The facility failed to ensure Residents #74, #95, and #99 were ensured full visual privacy.This could place the residents at risk of lower self-esteem. Findings included:1. Record review of Resident #74's quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included bone infection, multiple pressure ulcers, and cerebral palsy. Her BIMS score was 15, indicating she was cognitively intact. Her Functional Abilities assessment reflected she required staff assistance with all of her ADLs. Record review of Resident #74's care plan, dated 12/04/25, reflected she had bowel and bladder incontinence, had an ADL self-care deficit, and was at risk…
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 30 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-05 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from abuse for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #2) reviewed for abuse. The facility failed to ensure Resident #3 did not physically abuse Resident #2. On 07/17/25, Residents #2 and #3 physically attacked each other and Resident #2 suffered scratches to her left cheek and lip. The noncompliance was identified as PNC. The noncompliance began on 07/17/25 and ended on 07/17/25. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the survey began. This failure placed residents at risk for abuse. Findings included: Record review of Resident #2's Quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 07/23/25, reflected she was a [AGE] year-old female who was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident had severe cognitive impairment with a BIMS (cognitive screening tool) score of 2. She was noted to have had physical behaviors directed towards others for 4 to 6 days. Her active diagnoses included non-Alzheimer's disease (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 before2025-07-15 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement comprehensive person-centered care plans for each resident that included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that were identified in the comprehensive assessment for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for comprehensive care plans. The facility failed to develop a care plan for Resident #1's Foley catheter. This failure placed resident at risk of not receiving appropriate care. Findings included:Record review of Resident #1's MDS dated [DATE] reflected the resident was [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged [DATE]. The MDS reflected Resident #1's cognition was intact with a BIMS score of 15, and his diagnoses included quadriplegia (a condition characterized by the loss of function or paralysis in all four limbs and sometimes the torso), neurogenic bladder (a dysfunction that results from interference with the normal nerve…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-15 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident who enters the facility with an indwelling catheter receives appropriate treatment and services for 1 of 3 (Resident #1) reviewed for catheters.The facility failed to obtain physician orders to address the treatment and services that were to be provided to care for Resident #1's Foley catheter.The failure placed residents at risk for catheter complications and infection. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's MDS dated [DATE] reflected the resident was [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged [DATE]. The MDS reflected Resident #1's cognition was intact with a BIMS score of 15, and his diagnoses included quadriplegia (a condition characterized by the loss of function or paralysis in all four limbs and sometimes the torso), neurogenic bladder (a dysfunction that results from interference with the normal nerve pathways associated with urination), and Stage 2 pressure ulcer of the right buttock (a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-06-04 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that an alleged violation involving abuse was reported immediately but not later than 2 hours after the allegation was made to the Administrator of the facility for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for abuse. LVN A failed to immediately report an abuse allegation to the Administrator, who was the facility's abuse coordinator, when she overheard CNA B verbally abusing Resident #1 in early May 2025. This failure could have caused residents to experience abuse by staff. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's admission Record, dated 06/04/25, reflected she was a [AGE] year-old female who originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Record review of Resident #1's Quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 04/01/25, reflected she had a BIMS score of 06, which indicated severe cognitive impairment. Her active diagnoses included Non-Alzheimer's Dementia (a general decline in cognitive abilities that…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-15 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were treated with respect, dignity, and care in a manner and in an environment that promotes maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life for 1 of 8 residents (Resident #5) reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to treat Resident #5 with dignity when staff failed to assist the resident with colostomy care, resulting in it leaking and causing her to feel embarrassed in front of her roommate. This failure could cause the resident embarrassment and a decreased sense of self-worth. Findings included: Record review of Resident #5's undated admission Record reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included stroke affecting the rights side of her body, legal blindness, and rectal cancer requiring the creation of a colostomy (opening in the intestine to drain feces into a bag). Record review of Resident #5's quarterly MDS, dated [DATE] reflected a BIMS…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-15 · tag F0691 — failed to provide colostomy / ostomy care — isolatedProvide appropriate colostomy, urostomy, or ileostomy care/services for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents who require colostomy, urostomy, or ileostomy services, receive such care consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the resident's goals and preferences for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #5) reviewed for ostomy care. The facility failed to assist Resident #5 with colostomy care resulting in her colostomy leaking. This failure could place the resident at risk of skin irritation and breakdown from exposure to fecal matter. Findings included: Record review of Resident #5's undated admission Record reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included stroke affecting the rights side of her body, legal blindness, and rectal cancer requiring the creation of a colostomy (opeing in the intestines to allow feces to drain into a bag). Record review of Resident #5's quarterly MDS, dated [DATE] reflected a BIMS score of 10…
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 · E2024-09-26 · tag F0644 — patternCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to incorporate the recommendations from the Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) Level II determination and the PASARR evaluation report for 8 (Residents #2, #3, #15, #23, #29, #39, #62, #71) of 10 residents reviewed for PASARR assessments. The facility failed to submit a Nursing Facility Specialized Services (NFSS) form request by the specific deadline for Residents #2, #3, #15, #23, #29, #39, #62, and #71. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving or benefiting from specialized therapy and equipment services they may require. Findings included: Review of Resident #2's face sheet, dated [DATE], reflected a [AGE] year-old female initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Review of Resident #2's most recent Quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set) Assessment, dated [DATE], reflected a BIMS of 06 indicating severe cognitive impairment. Resident #2 had diagnoses of anxiety disorder (significant and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-26 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with the resident rights, that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment for 2 of 6 residents (Residents #13 and Resident #63) reviewed for comprehensive care plans. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #13's care plan was revised to include her pleasure feedings. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #63's care plan was revised to include his dialysis treatment. This failure could place residents at risk of not having their individual needs met, not receiving necessary care and services, and a decreased quality of life. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #13's Face Sheet, dated 09/26/24, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE].…
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 before2024-09-26 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident who is unable to carry out activities of daily living receives the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene for 1 (Residents #25) of five residents reviewed for ADL care. The facility failed to provide Resident #25 assistance with timely incontinence care. The failure could place the residents at risk for decreased feelings of self-worth, skin breakdown, and infection. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #25's face sheet, dated 09/26/24, indicated Resident #25 was a [AGE] year-old male, admitted to the facility on [DATE], and readmitted on [DATE]. Record review of Resident #25's admission MDS assessment, dated 09/05/24, revealed Resident #25's BIMS score was 11 indicating his cognition was moderately impaired. Resident #25 required substantial/maximal assistance with toileting. Resident #25 was dependent on staff for shower/bathing and personal hygiene.…
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 before2024-09-26 · tag F0694 — isolatedProvide for the safe, appropriate administration of IV fluids for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure parenteral fluids were administered consistent with professional standards for 1 (Resident #81) of 2 residents reviewed for intravenous fluids. The facility failed to ensure Resident #81's intravenous medication bag and tubing were labeled with the date, time, and initials. The facility failed to ensure Resident #81 received timely PICC line (used to deliver medications and other treatments directly to the large central veins near heart) dressing change. Resident #81 went without a dressing change for 8 days. The failures could affect residents by placing them at risk for infections and cross-contamination and at risk for medication error, and delay in medication administration. Findings included: Review of Resident #81's entry MDS assessment, dated 09/24/24, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident had diagnoses including which included: Pneumonia, (lung infection that…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-26 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services (including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals) to meet the needs of each resident on 1 of 4 medication carts (100 Hall medication aide cart) and 2 of 2 residents (Residents#36 and #57) reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to ensure the 100 Hall medication aide medication cart contained accurate narcotic logs for Residents #36 and #57. These failures could place residents at risk for medication error, drug diversion, and delay in medication administration. Findings included: 1. Review of Resident# 36's Quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 08/08/24, reflected the resident was [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included encounter for palliative care. The resident had severe impaired cognition with a BIMS score of 3. She received scheduled pain medication regimen. Review of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-07-05 · 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 observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure the resident environment remained free of accident hazards as was possible for 1 of 1 doorway in the south hallway of Zone 3 in between the vending machines and the doorway to the smoking courtyard reviewed for accidents and hazards. The facility failed to ensure residents who accessed the south hallway of Zone 3 in between the vending machines and the doorway to the smoking courtyard was free of hazards, when a large puddle of water was observed on July 5, 2024. The facility failed to ensure the south hallway of Zone 3 in between the vending machines and the doorway to the smoking courtyard was free of slip/fall hazards. Findings included: Observation on 07/05/2024 at 12:07 PM of the south hallway of Zone 3 between the vending machines and the door to the smoking courtyard revealed a large puddle of water that had entered from the gaps in the doorway and missing threshold during a brief rain shower approximately 20 minutes prior. Four residents had to be cautioned about the water on the floor while…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-07 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an Infection Prevention and Control Program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for one (Resident #1) of four residents observed for infection control. The facility failed to prevent Resident #1's indwelling urinary Foley catheter device from contact with the floor. This failure could place the residents at risk of cross-contamination and development of infection. Findings included: Review of Resident #1's Face Sheet, dated 06/07/2024, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE]. One of his diagnoses was obstructive and reflux uropathy (a condition where urine cannot flow because of blockage in the urinary tract). Review of Resident #1's Quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 05/04/2024, reflected Resident #1 had a moderate impairment in cognition with a BIMS score of 08. The Quarterly MDS…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-04-04 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — patternDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plans for 3 (Residents #1, #2, and #3) of 5 residents reviewed for comprehensive care plans in that: The MDS Coordinators failed to individualize the care plans, to include interventions, for Residents #1, #2, and #3. This failure could place the residents at risk of receiving the individualized care they required. Findings included: Review of Resident #1's undated admission Record revealed the resident was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included fracture of right lower leg. morbid obesity, heart failure, and asthma. Review of Resident #1's admission MDS assessment, dated 01/04/24, revealed a BIMS score of 10 indicating she had mild cognitive impairment. Her Functional Status indicated she required assistance with most of her ADLs. Review of Resident #1's care plan, dated 01/01/24 revealed her care plan had not been individualized. Resident #1 has…
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 before2024-04-04 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident who is unable to carry out activities of daily living, receives the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene for 1 (Resident #1) of 3 residents reviewed for ADLs. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 was not left in a soiled brief for an extended period of time on 04/04/24. This failure could place the resident at risk for skin breakdown. Findings included: Review of Resident #1's undated admission Record revealed the resident was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included fracture of right lower leg, morbid obesity, heart failure, and asthma. Review of Resident #1's admission MDS assessment, dated 01/04/24, revealed a BIMS score of 10 indicating she was mildly cognitively impaired. Her Functional Status indicated she required assistance with most of her ADLs, and assistance of 1-2 people for toileting. Her Bowel and Bladder…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-01-17 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to store all drugs and biologicals in locked compartments and assure only authorized personnel had access to the keys for 1 (Resident #2) of 1 resident reviewed for pharmacy services, in that: The facility failed to ensure that Resident #2's albuterol inhaler, one bottle of levocetirizine (allergy medication) 5 mg, eleven pills Slow Fe (iron) tablets, and two yeast plus tablets were stored in a secured place. This failure could place all residents on the 300 Hall North at risk of drug diversion or misuse of medications. Findings included: Record review of Resident #2's face sheet, dated 01/17/24, revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included: allergic rhinitis (inflammation of the inside of the nose caused by an allergen, such as pollen, dust, mold, or flakes of skin from certain animals), acute respiratory failure (serious condition that makes it difficult to breathe), and asthma (narrow and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-01-17 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an environment as free of accident hazards as is possible for one (Resident #3) of five resident rooms reviewed for accidents and hazards. The facility failed to ensure the closet doors in Resident #3's room were maintained in a safe and functional manner. This failure could place residents at risk of accidents or injury. Findings included: Record review of Resident #3's face sheet dated 01/17/24 indicated the resident was a [AGE] year-old male, initially admitted on [DATE], and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included weakness, reduced mobility, contracture (shortening of muscles) unspecified joint, contracture unspecified knee, muscle weakness, history of falling, age related nuclear cataract, bilateral (major cause of blindness), epilepsy (nerve cell activity in the brain is disturbed causing seizures). Record review of Resident #3's MDS assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #3 had moderately impaired cognition…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-01-17 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain medical records on each resident that are accurately documented for 1 (Resident #1) of 3 residents reviewed for accurate medical records in that: LVN A failed to complete the initial admission assessment documentation on Resident #1 when she admitted to the facility on [DATE]. LVN A failed to document on the MAR/TAR indicating what medication Resident #1 admitted with and whether any of the medications were administered during Resident #1's short stay in the facility. This deficient practice could result in misinformation about professional care provided. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's electronic face sheet dated 10/21/23 reflected the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included: unspecified fracture of shaft of humerus (the bone of the upper arm) and arm, diabetes (group of diseases that affect how the body uses blood sugar) and fracture of the nasal bone. Record review of Resident #1's chart…
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 before2024-01-08 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — patternProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services (including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals) to meet the needs of each resident for two (Resident #1 and Resident #2) of four residents reviewed for and pharmacy services. 1. The facility failed to follow physician orders and provide Resident #1's treatment to her newly amputated leg sutures and incision site on 12/25/23, 12/27/23, 01/01/24 and 01/03/24. 2. The facility failed to follow physician orders and provide Resident #2 her analgesic topical pain medications of Diclofenac Sodium External Gel on 01/05/23 and a Lidocaine Patch on 01/02/24, 01/03/24 and 01/05/23. The failure could place residents at risk for increased pain, infection and physical discomfort. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #1's Face Sheet dated 12/27/23 reflected she was a [AGE] year old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE] with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-01-08 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents who required dialysis received such services, consistent with professional standards of practice for one (Resident #1) of three reviewed for quality of care. The facility failed to maintain ongoing communication and collaboration with the dialysis facility regarding dialysis care and services for Residents #1. The failure could place residents who received dialysis at risk for complications and not receiving proper care and treatment to meet their needs. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's Face Sheet dated 12/27/23 reflected she was a [AGE] year old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included atherosclerosis (thickening and hardening of the arteries) of native arteries of left leg with ulceration (a long-lasting (chronic) sore that takes more than 2 weeks to heal) of other part of foot, paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (occurs when a rapid, erratic heart rate begins suddenly…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-01-08 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure, in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices, maintained medical records on each resident that were complate and accurately documented for one (Resident #1) of four residents reviewed for quality of care. The facility failed to provide wound care to Resident #1's coccyx on 12/25/23, 12/26/23, 12/27/23, 12/30/23 and 01/01/24 through 01/04/24 and document when it was provided. The facility failure placed residents at risk of continued pain, discomfort, infection and a worsening of their wounds. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's Face Sheet dated 12/27/23 reflected she was a [AGE] year old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included atherosclerosis (thickening and hardening of the arteries) of native arteries of left leg with ulceration (a long-lasting (chronic) sore that takes more than 2 weeks to heal) of other part of foot, paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (occurs…
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 before2023-10-30 · 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, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designated to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable disease and infection for eight (Rooms #302, #303, #305, #306, #307, #308, #309) of ten rooms reviewed for infection control. CNA A failed to use hand hygiene while passing lunch trays on the 300 hall Rooms #302, #303, #305, #306, #307, #308, #309. These failures could place residents at-risk of cross contamination which could result in infections or illness. Findings included: Observation on 10/20/23 at 11:45 AM-12:08 PM of CNA A on hall 300, was observation of the food cart that was pushed to the floor (hall), and CNA A approached the food cart and proceeded down the hall (300). CNA A did not use hand hygiene prior to touching the food cart, prior to touching food trays, or while passing out lunch trays to residents on 300 hall. CNA A approached the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-10-30 · tag F0646 — isolatedNotify the appropriate authorities when residents with MD or ID services has a significant change in condition.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, it was determined the facility failed to inform the state mental health authority or state intellectual disability authority, as applicable, promptly after a significant change in mental or physical condition of a resident who has mental illness or intellectual disability for one (Resident #1) of one resident reviewed. The facility failed to notify Resident #1's state mental health agency or intellectual disability agency of a significant change for Resident #1 when he expired on [DATE]. This failure could affect residents in the facility that are PASRR positive for their mental health agency or state intellectual disability agency not being notified of a significant change for residents. Findings included: Review of Residents #1's discharged face sheet, dated [DATE], reflected the resident admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged from the facility on [DATE]. His diagnoses included acute respiratory failure with hypoxia (below normal level of oxygen in the blood),…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-08-22 · tag F0645 — patternPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident in a nursing facility is screened for a mental disorder (MD) or intellectual disability (ID) prior to admission and that individuals identified with MD or ID are evaluated and receive care and services in the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs for 6 (Residents #8, #10, #34, #38, #40, and #76) of 8 residents reviewed for PASARR compliance. The facility failed to follow up on Residents #8, #10, #34, #38, #40, and #76, who were PASARR Level I positive and refer them to the local authority for further evaluation to determine their need for specialized services. This failure placed the residents at risk of not receiving the full extent of services available to them and/or alternative living accommodations. Findings included: Record review of residents triggered for PASARR review revealed six residents had not been referred to the local authority for PASARR II screening or had form 1012 filed verifying they had dementia…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-08-22 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — patternProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure that residents receive treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice for 1 (Resident #82) of 18 residents reviewed for quality of care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #82 received dressing changes to his lower legs as scheduled. This failure placed the resident at risk of infection and decreased feelings of self-worth. Findings included: Review of Resident #82's admission Record revealed the resident was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included skin infection to both lower legs, heart failure, and reduced mobility. Review of Resident # 82's admission MDS, dated [DATE], revealed a BIMS score of 13 indicating he was cognitively intact. His Functional Status indicated he required limited assistance with his ADLs. Review of Resident #82's care plan, dated 07/17/23, revealed he had edema, putting him at risk for fluid imbalance; venous ulcers to both lower…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-08-22 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — patternProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents maintained acceptable parameters of nutritional status based on the residents' comprehensive assessments for 4 (Residents #90, #91, #204, and #206) of 18 residents reviewed for nutrition. The facility failed to obtain Resident #90, #91, #204, #206 weights at admission per facility policy. This failure placed the resident at risk of infection and decreased feelings of self-worth. Findings included: Review of Resident #90's admission Record, dated 08/22/23, revealed the resident was a [AGE] year-old male, admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included end stage renal disease (kidney disease), and high blood pressure Review of Resident # 90's quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], revealed a BIMS score of 14 indicating the resident was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #90's care plan, dated 04/09/023, revealed Resident #90 had a potential risk of malnutrition, had an altered diet, renal regular diet. The care…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-08-22 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents who were unable to carry out activities of daily living received necessary services to maintain good nutrition for 2 (Residents #37 and #81) of 18 residents reviewed for ADL's. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #37 was getting assistance with feeding. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #81 was bathed as scheduled. This failure had the potential to affect residents by placing them at risk for poor nutrition and a decline in their quality of life. Findings included: Review of Resident #37's MDS dated [DATE] revealed the resident was an [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included end stage renal disease, Alzheimer's disease, glaucoma, and dysphagia. Resident #37 had severely impaired cognition rarely/never understood others and never/rarely made self-understood. The MDS further revealed Resident #37 required extensive assistance of one person for eating. Review of 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 · Dcited before2023-08-22 · tag F0694 — isolatedProvide for the safe, appropriate administration of IV fluids for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure parenteral fluids were administered consistent with professional standards of practice and in accordance with physician orders and the comprehenxive person-centered care plan for 1 (Resident #97) of 1 resident reviewed for parenteral fluids. The facility failed to ensure Resident #97's PICC line dressing remained intact. This failure placed the resident at risk of infection. Findings included: Review of Resident #97's admission Record revealed he was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of bone infection of the right foot and ankle with right 4th toe amputation. Review of Resident #97's admission MDS, dated [DATE], revealed a BIMS score of 12 indicating moderate cognitive impairment. His Functional Status indicated he required limited assistance with his ADLs. Review of Resident #97's care plan revealed he had a surgical site to his right foot requiring wound care and dressing changes; IV access…
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 · D2023-08-22 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — isolatedEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident received and the facility provided food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs for one (Resident #37) of five residents reviewed for therapeutic diets. The facility failed to provide Resident #37 a pureed diet as prescribed by the physician. The failure placed residents at risk for aspiration and weight loss. Findings included: Review of Resident #37's MDS dated [DATE] revealed she was an [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included end stage renal disease, Alzheimer's disease, glaucoma, and dysphagia. Resident #37 had severely impaired cognition rarely/never understood others and never/rarely made self-understood. Review of Resident #37's physicians order summary report for August 2023 revealed she was on a regular diet, puree texture with a start date of 05/15/23. Review of Resident #37's hospital records dated 05/12/23 revealed the following: Speech-Language…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-08-03 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — patternMake sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain a safe, functional, sanitary, and comfortable environment for 3 (rooms [ROOM NUMBER]) of 10 rooms observed. The facility failed to maintain rooms [ROOM NUMBER] in a safe and sanitary condition. This failure could place residents at risk for decreased quality of life. Findings included: Observation on 08/03/23 during the following hours revealed: 9:45 AM - room [ROOM NUMBER] - The window screen was bent at the bottom and detached from the window leaving a gap between the window and the screen. 10:01 AM - room [ROOM NUMBER] - There were three ceiling tiles that were slightly bulging out and had water stains on them right above the window. The window screen was bent at the bottom leaving a gap between the screen and the window. 10:01 AM - room [ROOM NUMBER] - The bottom half of the window screen was ripped. Interview on 08/03/23 at 12:04 PM with the Maintenance Director revealed he was aware of the ripped and dented screens. He…
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
$31,539 in federal fines across 3 penalties.
- $8,281 — penalty dated 2025-09-05
- $15,126 — penalty dated 2025-02-15
- $8,132 — penalty dated 2024-06-07
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to CREATIVE SOLUTIONS IN HEALTHCARE — 149 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 1 of 5 | 2.1 | -1.1 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 2.7 | -0.7 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 1.1 | -0.1 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 3.2 | +0.8 vs chain |
The other 148 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.1★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 148; lowest-rated first.
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| HUGGINS, LINDA | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 11/01/2022 |
| CREATIVE SOLUTIONS IN HEALTHCARE INC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 11/01/2022 |
| BLAKE, GARY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 11/01/2022 |
| BLAKE, MALISA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 11/01/2022 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 5 rows in the source record cover these 4 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 76% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 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 TX
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 Texas 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 455819. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-12-11, 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.