Portside Health & Rehab Center
4201 Greenwood Drive, Portsmouth, VA 23701 · For profit - Corporation · 132 certified beds · (757) 673-5000 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- inspectors recorded 1 serious finding as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (46) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $8,018 in federal fines (most recent 2024-08-01)
- 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 (2/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 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 improved from 1 to 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 6.3% | 14.9% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 8.3% | 5.4% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 1.1% | 0.4% | 0.9% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 1.6% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 5.8% | 18.7% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 2.4% | 3.6% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 3.6% | 15.6% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 15.1% | 20.6% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 96.2% | 94.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.7% | 4.7% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 16.2% | 21.8% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 8.3% | 14.2% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.8% | 1.3% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 56.9% | 73.6% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 19.2% | 22.3% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 16.8% | 11.5% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 0.96 | 1.52 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.66 | 1.48 | 1.80 | 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.
69.5% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 149 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 57.5% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 87 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.21 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 23% 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 | 69.5%CMS range 59.0–76.5 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.6%CMS range 7.6–13.7 | 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 | 57.5% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 66.7% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 42.5% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 82.1% | 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 | 95.7% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 88.6% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 3.6% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.5%CMS range 3.8–10.4 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.74 | 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 132 beds and averages 122.9 residents a day — about 93% occupied, or roughly 9 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.44 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.46 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.02 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 2.95 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.64 on weekdays — 19% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.53 to 0.28 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 47% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
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.
46 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 34 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · G2024-08-01 · 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 observation, resident interview, staff interview, clinical record review, and review of facility documents, the facility staff failed to ensure one resident was safe from falling during ADL Care, which constituted harm for 1 of 8 residents (Resident #4), in the survey sample. The findings included: Resident #4 was originally admitted to the facility 2/12/22. The resident was last discharged from the facility to a local hospital after a fall and returned 6/26/24. The resident's diagnoses included left hip fracture, distal right femur periprosthetic displaced comminuted fracture, anemia, muscle weakness, hypertension, and depression. The significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 7/2/24 coded the resident as completing the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) and scoring 15 out of a possible 15. This indicated Resident #4's cognitive abilities for daily decision making were intact. A fall risk assessment was conducted on 4/18/24. Resident #4 was categorized as requiring assistance or supervision for mobility, transfer,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Actual harm · G2019-05-01 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, resident interview, staff interviews, clinical record review, and review of the facility policy the facility staff failed to identify a pressure ulcer and institute appropriate interventions, care and treatment for 1 of 42 residents (Resident #44), in the survey sample. The facility staff failed to identify Resident #44's sacral pressure ulcer prior to it advancing to a stage three pressure ulcer; which presented with 70% slough (non-viable) tissue, 30% granulation tissue and measured 0.8 centimeters x 1.0 centimeters x 0.1 centimeters, requiring surgical debridement (removal) to promote healing, which constituted harm. The findings included: Resident #44 was admitted to the nursing facility on 5/3/17, and re-admitted to the facility 4/13/19, after an acute hospital stay. The current diagnoses included heart failure and asthma. Resident #44's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 3/15/19, coded the resident as completing the Brief Interview 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 · E2024-12-12 · tag F0641 — patternEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY 4. For Resident #10 (R10), the facility staff failed to complete the pain assessment interview of section J of the MDS (minimum data set) assessment. Review of the annual MDS with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 9/12/2024, R10 was assessed as scoring 7 out of 15 on the BIMS (brief interview for mental status) assessment indicating that they were moderately impaired for making daily decisions. Section J documented in part, J0200. Should Pain Assessment Interview be Conducted? Attempt to conduct interview with all residents. If resident is comatose, skip to J1100, Shortness of Breath (dyspnea). Enter Code. 0. No (resident is rarely/never understood). Skip to and complete J0800, Indicators of Pain or Possible Pain . Section J0800 was observed to be blank. On 12/12/24 at 8:41 a.m., an interview was conducted with LPN (licensed practical nurse) #5, MDS coordinator. LPN #5 stated that when completing Section J, they always interviewed or attempted the interview for pain. She stated that the interview was done to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-12-12 · tag F0655 — patternCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, staff/resident interviews facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined the facility staff failed to develop/implement a baseline care plan for two of 43 residents in the survey sample, Resident #176 (R176) and R177. The findings include: 1. A. The facility failed to develop a baseline care plan to include PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder) for R176. R176 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis that included but were not limited to PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder), CHF (congestive heart failure) and CVA (cerebrovascular accident). The most recent MDS (minimum data set) assessment, an admission assessment, with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 12/3/24, coded the resident as scoring a 14 out of 15 on the BIMS (brief interview for mental status) score, indicating the resident was not cognitively impaired. A review of the MDS Section GG-functional abilities and goals coded the resident as requiring moderate assistance for mobility/transfers…
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 before2024-12-12 · 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 4. For Resident #70 (R70), the facility staff failed to develop the comprehensive care plan to include the use of an elbow splint. On 12/9/24 at 8:16 p.m., an observation was made of R70 in bed. R70 was observed with limited range of motion (ROM) in the right hand. No splinting device was observed in use. Additional observation on 12/10/24 at 8:25 a.m. revealed R70 in bed with no splinting device and limited ROM in the right hand. The comprehensive care plan for R70 failed to address the limited range of motion or use of any splinting devices. The most recent OT (occupational therapy) evaluation and plan of treatment dated 8/14/24-9/11/24 documented treatments including but not limited to splinting and increasing finger flexion. The evaluation documented a right upper extremity contracture and impairment of the right hand. Under Recommendations it documented Splint/Orthotic Recommendations: It is recommended the patient wear an elbow extension splint on right elbow for during daily tasks in order to inhibit…
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 before2024-12-12 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — patternDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
4. For Resident #89, the facility staff failed to review and revise the comprehensive care plan for the use of an indwelling catheter. The comprehensive care plan dated, 7/11/24, documented in part, Problem: Urinary Incontinence: Incontinence d/t (due to) dx (diagnosis) of muscle weakness, lack of coordination, dementia and Alzheimer's. The Approach failed to evidence any documentation related to the use of an indwelling catheter. On 12/10/24 at 8:45 a.m. Resident was observed in bed, an indwelling catheter bag was noted hanging off the bedframe. The physician orders dated, 7/8/24, documented, Change foley (indwelling) catheter as needed. 18 fr (french) 10 cc (cubic centimeters). Special Instructions: Document catheter (french) and balloon (ml - milliliters) size inserted PRN (as needed). Further review of the physician orders failed to evidence an order for indwelling catheter care. Review of the MAR for October, November and December 2024, failed to evidence documentation of indwelling catheter care. An interview was conducted with LPN (licensed practical nurse) #4 on 12/12/24 at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-12-12 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — patternProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on resident interview, observation, staff interview, and clinical record review, it was determined the facility staff failed to administer medications and/or treatments per the physician orders for two of 43 residents in the survey sample, Residents #32 and #8. The findings include: 1. For Resident #32 (R32), the facility staff failed to apply treatments, to include benzocaine (1) and telfa (non-stick dressing), to the resident's legs per the physician order. An interview was conducted with R32 on 12/10/24 at 2:25 p.m. The resident stated he had vascular wounds on both of his legs. He stated the facility runs out of the non-adhesive dressings and then when they are done the next time, the dressings they have put on sticks to the wounds and when pulled off, even after the nurse wets them with wound cleanser, it pulls off the healing tissue. The physician order dated 3/6/24, documented, Clean left leg with DWC (wound cleanser), pat dry, apply benzocaine to wound bed, place telfa pad, ABD (abdominal pad) and gauze daily and PRN (as needed). Clean right leg with DWC, pat dry,…
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 · E2024-12-12 · 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 staff interview, resident interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined the facility staff failed to provide monitoring for fluid restriction and intake for one of 43residents, R177. The findings include: The facility failed to provide monitoring for fluid restriction and intake for R177. R177 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis that included but were not limited to ESRD (end stage renal disease), convulsions and atrial fibrillation. The most recent MDS (minimum data set) assessment, an admission assessment, with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 12/2/24, coded the resident as scoring a 01 out of 15 on the BIMS (brief interview for mental status) score, indicating the resident was severely cognitively impaired. A review of the MDS Section GG-functional abilities and goals coded the resident as being dependent for mobility/transfers and eating. Section I: ESRD checked and Section O: oxygen: yes. A review of the baseline care plan dated 11/27/24…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-12-12 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — patternEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY 2.The facility staff failed to ensure R176 was free of unnecessary medications by monitoring anticoagulant as ordered. R176 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis that included but were not limited to PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder), CHF (congestive heart failure) and CVA (cerebrovascular accident). The most recent MDS (minimum data set) assessment, an admission assessment, with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 12/3/24, coded the resident as scoring a 14 out of 15 on the BIMS (brief interview for mental status) score, indicating the resident was not cognitively impaired. A review of the MDS Section GG-functional abilities and goals coded the resident as requiring moderate assistance for mobility/transfers and eating. Section N: anticoagulant: yes. A review of the physician's order dated 11/27/24 revealed, Eliquis 5 mg po twice daily. A review of the MAR did not reveal evidence of anticoagulation monitoring. On 12/11/24 at 2:05 PM, an interview was conducted with LPN (licensed practical…
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 · E2024-12-12 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, and facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to maintain fans in a sanitary manner in one of one kitchen and dispose of expired supplements in one of two facility nourishment rooms. The findings include: A. On 12/9/24 at 6:38 p.m., an observation was made of the facility kitchen. Observation of the dishwasher area revealed two approximately 12-inch round fans hanging from the wall in the dishwasher area facing the passthrough dishwasher. Visible dust and rust was observed on the cage of both fans. On 12/10/24 at 11:48 a.m., observation of the two round fans in the dishwasher area of the kitchen revealed the same as above. On 12/10/24 at 12:10 p.m., an interview was conducted with OSM (other staff member) #6, dietary manager. OSM #6 stated that the dietary staff were responsible for cleaning dust off the fans and maintenance fixed the fans if they malfunctioned. He stated that they brushed them off when they were dusty, and they had a problem with condensation in the room which caused the rust on the fan cages…
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 · E2024-12-12 · tag F0909 — failed to maintain a comfortable temperature — patternRegularly inspect all bed frames, mattresses, and bed rails (if any) for safety; and all bed rails and mattresses must attach safely to the bed frame.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, clinical record review and facility document review, it was determined the facility staff failed to evidence bed inspections for four of 43 residents in the survey sample, Residents #23, #70, #10 and #20. The findings include: 1. For Resident #23 (R23), the facility staff failed to evidence a bed inspection prior to the use of bed rails. On 12/9/24 at 8:04 p.m., an observation was made of R23 in bed with bilateral upper bed rails in place. Additional observation on 12/10/24 at 9:39 a.m. revealed R23 in bed with bilateral upper bed rails in place. A physician's order dated 11/25/24 for R23 documented Bedrails as tolerated r/t (related to) bed mobility. An enabler-restraint observation for R23 dated 11/21/24 documented the use of 1/4 side rails bilaterally. The assessment failed to evidence a bed inspection for safety. The comprehensive care plan for R23 failed to evidence the use of bed rails. A review of the facility's bed and rail maintenance evaluation book documented all facility beds inspected on 12/10/24. On 12/11/24 at 12:35 p.m., an…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-12-12 · tag F0554 — isolatedAllow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, resident interview, staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to assess a resident for the self-administration of medication for one of 43 residents in the survey sample, Resident #32. The findings include: For Resident #32, the facility staff failed to assess the resident for self-administration of medications, Breyna (1). Observation was made on 12/10/24 at 2:30 p.m. of the R32's room. The resident was observed to have his Breyna respiratory inhaler on the bedside table. He stated he keeps it there for when he needs it. The physician order dated, 3/4/24, documented, Breyna (budesonide - formoterol) HFA aerosol inhaler; 160 - 4.5 mcg (micrograms) per actuation; amt (amount) 2 puffs; Inhalation. Special Instruction: 2 puff inhale orally two times a day for COPD (1), rinse mouth with water after each use. Review of the clinical record, failed to evidence a physician order for the resident to self-administer his…
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 34 citations
- Potential for harm · D2024-12-12 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, staff/resident interviews facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined the facility staff failed to accommodate resident needs for one of 43 residents in the survey sample, R25. The findings include: For R25, the facility staff failed to maintain the call light in a position where they could access it. Resident #25 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis that included but were not limited to ESRD (end stage renal disease), Sepsis and bilateral osteoarthritis. The most recent MDS (minimum data set) assessment, an admission assessment, with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 10/18/24, coded the resident as scoring a 15 out of 15 on the BIMS (brief interview for mental status) score, indicating the resident was not cognitively impaired. A review of the MDS Section GG-functional abilities and goals coded the resident as requiring supervision for transfer/dressing/toileting and eating. A review of the comprehensive care plan dated 11/27/24 revealed,…
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 before2024-12-12 · tag F0623 — isolatedProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY 3. The facility staff failed to evidence provision of required written RP (responsible party) notification at the time of discharge for Resident #90. Resident #90 was transferred to the hospital on [DATE]. Resident #90 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis that included but were not limited to colon cancer, dementia, falls and femur fracture. The most recent MDS (minimum data set) assessment, an admission assessment, with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 12/2/24, coded the resident as scoring a 02 out of 15 on the BIMS (brief interview for mental status) score, indicating the resident was severely cognitively impaired. A review of the comprehensive care plan dated 5/27/24 revealed, PROBLEM: Resident at risk for falling related to generalized weakness with dementia and history of colon cancer. APPROACH: Observe frequently and place in supervised area when out of bed. Encourage resident to assume a standing position slowly. Keep bed in lowest position with brakes locked. Always keep call light…
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 before2024-12-12 · tag F0625 — isolatedNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on clinical record review, staff interview and facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to evidence bed hold notice provided for a facility-initiated transfer for one of 43 residents in the survey sample, Resident #9. The findings include: For Resident #9 (R9), the facility staff failed to evidence bed hold notice was provided to the responsible party for a facility-initiated transfer on 11/24/24. The progress notes for R9 documented in part, - 11/24/2024 09:00 Paramedics arrived and tended to resident while SN gave paramedics report. The resident continued to rapidly decline and resident was placed on a non-rebreather by paramedics. Facesheet, InterAct form, med list and DNR (do not resuscitate) form sent with resident which was emergently transported to [Name of hospital]. Report called to ER and to [Name of insurance company]. Message left with wife who is primary contact and legal representative. - 11/25/2024 0:31 (12:31 a.m.) This writer called [Name of hospital] for resident update. Per [Name of staff member] resident has been admitted…
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 · D2024-12-12 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, clinical record review, staff interview and facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to provide services to maintain or improve mobility for one of 43 residents in the survey sample, Resident #70. The findings include: For Resident #70 (R70), the facility staff failed to follow therapy recommendations for the use of a splinting device. On 12/9/24 at 8:16 p.m., an observation was made of R70 in bed. R70 was observed with limited range of motion (ROM) in the right hand. No splinting device was observed in use. Additional observation on 12/10/24 at 8:25 a.m. revealed R70 in bed with no splinting device and limited ROM in the right hand. The most recent OT (occupational therapy) evaluation and plan of treatment dated 8/14/24-9/11/24 documented treatments including but not limited to splinting and increasing finger flexion. The evaluation documented a right upper extremity contracture and impairment of the right hand. Under Recommendations it documented Splint/Orthotic Recommendations: It is recommended the patient wear an elbow…
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 · D2024-12-12 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined the facility staff failed to provide care and services for an indwelling catheter for one of 43 residents in the survey sample, Resident #89. The findings include: For Resident #89 (R89), the facility staff failed to evidence of providing catheter care. On 12/10/24 at 8:45 a.m. Resident was observed in bed, an indwelling catheter bag was noted hanging off the bedframe. the physician orders dated, 7/8/24, documented, Change foley (indwelling) catheter as needed. 18 fr (french) 10 cc (cubic centimeters). Special Instructions: Document catheter (french) and balloon (ml - milliliters) size inserted PRN (as needed). Further review of the physician orders failed to evidence an order for indwelling catheter care. Review of the MAR for October, November and December 2024, failed to evidence documentation of indwelling catheter care. Review of the comprehensive care plan dated, 7/11/24, documented in part, Problem: Urinary Incontinence: Incontinence d/t (due to) dx (diagnosis) 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 · D2024-12-12 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, clinical record review, staff interview and facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to obtain a physician's order for oxygen administration for one of 43 residents in the survey sample, Resident #9. The findings include: For Resident #9 (R9), the facility staff failed to obtain an order for the administration of oxygen (O2). The progress notes for R9 documented in part, - 11/23/2024 20:10 (8:10 p.m.) Resident in bed awake/alert and verbal. Resident has scattered rhonchi. Resident has O2 @ 2L/min (liters per minute) via NC (nasal cannula). IsoSource (enteral tube feeding) is not connected at this time per physician order. Staff will continue to monitor closely for any status change. - 12/07/2024 18:09 (6:09 p.m.) Resident completed ABT (antibiotic) for Pneumonia. No adverse reactions noted. Bed in low position, HOB (head of bed), and o2 running 2 L via nasal cannula. Will continue to monitor and report any changes in status. - 12/09/2024 20:20 (8:20 p.m.) During routine f/u (follow up) visit w/ MD [Name of physician], family…
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 · D2024-12-12 · tag F0699 — isolatedProvide care or services that was trauma informed and/or culturally competent.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on resident interview, staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to provide trauma informed care for one of 43 residents in the sample Resident #176 (R176). The findings include: The facility failed to evidence provision of trauma informed care for Resident #176. R176 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis that included but were not limited to PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder), CHF (congestive heart failure) and CVA (cerebrovascular accident). The most recent MDS (minimum data set) assessment, an admission assessment, with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 12/3/24, coded the resident as scoring a 14 out of 15 on the BIMS (brief interview for mental status) score, indicating the resident was not cognitively impaired. A review of the MDS Section GG-functional abilities and goals coded the resident as requiring moderate assistance for mobility/transfers and eating. Section I: PTSD yes. PTSD is listed on R176's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-12-12 · tag F0712 — isolatedEnsure that the resident and his/her doctor meet face-to-face at all required visits.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on clinical record review, staff interview, and facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to ensure timely physician visits for 1 of 43 residents in the survey sample, Resident #127. The findings include: For Resident #127 (R127), the facility staff failed to evidence a physician visit between 6/8/21 and 10/14/21. A review of the clinical record for physician visits documented a physician progress note for R127 dated 6/8/21 and the next dated 10/14/21, 127 days without a physician's visit. On 12/12/24 at 10:15 a.m., an interview was conducted with ASM (administrative staff member) #6, medical doctor who stated that long term care residents were seen every 60 days for recertification visits and she and the nurse practitioner alternated the visits. A request was made for a policy for physician visits however none was provided by the facility prior to exit. On 12/12/24 at approximately 2:09 p.m., ASM #1, the administrator, ASM #2, the director of nursing, ASM #3, the regional vice president of operations, ASM #4, the regional director of clinical…
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 · E2021-04-01 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — patternHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, staff and resident interview and review of facility documents, it was determined that the facility staff failed to ensure 3 out of 42 residents (R#453, #457 and #456) in the survey sample had the opportunity to formulate an Advance Directive. The findings include: 1. Resident #453 was admitted to the nursing facility on 3/25/21 with diagnoses that included stroke, high blood pressure and atrial fibrillation. The resident was her own authorized representative. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] coded the resident on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) with a score of 12 out of a total score of 15 which indicated the resident was moderately impaired in the cognitive skills for daily decision making. The resident was assessed with the ability to express ideas and wants and was able to fully comprehend others. The resident was not coded to possess behavioral or mood symptoms. On 3/30/21 at 1:10 p.m., Resident #453 stated she did not have an Advance…
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 · E2021-04-01 · tag F0800 — patternProvide each resident with a nourishing, palatable, well-balanced diet that meets his or her daily nutritional and special dietary needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview and facility document review, it was determined that facility staff failed to maintain hot foods at a temperature of 135 degrees or higher while holding on the steam table. The findings included: On 4/1/21 at 7:45 a.m., observation of the tray line was conducted. At 8:00 a.m., OSM (Other Staff Member) #3 was asked to provide the food temperatures before tray line had started. At the same time (8:00 a.m.) one cart had been sent out to the unit. At 8:10 a.m., OSM #3 was observed getting temperatures of the food on the steam table. When asked if the food temperature were taken prior to the start of tray line, OSM #3 stated that the cook had only documented two food items: The turkey sausage at 173.0 degrees Fahrenheit and the corn beef hash at 167.0 Fahrenheit. Observation was then conducted of OSM #3 taking temperatures of the rest of the food items on the steam table. The following low temperatures were recorded: Scrambled eggs- 131.0 degrees Fahrenheit Oatmeal- 123.1 degrees Fahrenheit The scrambled eggs were observed to be in a deep pan 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 · E2021-04-01 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview and facility document review, it was determined that facility staff failed to serve food at palatable temperatures. The findings included: On 4/1/21 at 7:45 a.m., observation of the tray line was conducted. All plate bottom warmers were observed being warmed up from an Aladdin (Brand Name) machine. Plates were then placed on top of the warmer, food placed on the plates and then covered with a lid. At 8:00 a.m., OSM (Other Staff Member) #3 was asked to provide the food temperatures before tray line had started. At the same time (8:00 a.m.) one cart had been sent out to the unit. At 8:10 a.m., OSM #3 was observed getting temperatures of the food on the steam table. When asked if the food temperature were taken prior to the start of tray line, OSM #3 stated that the cook had only documented two food items: The turkey sausage at 173.0 degrees Fahrenheit and the corn beef hash at 167.0 Fahrenheit. Observation was then conducted of OSM #3 taking temperatures of the rest of the food items on the steam table. The following temperatures were recorded in…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-04-01 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interviews, clinical record review and facility documentation review the facility staff failed to follow 2 physician orders for 1 of 42 residents in the survey sample, Resident #82. The findings included: 1. For Resident #82, the facility staff failed to follow physician order and discontinue medication. Facility staff failed to remove Scopolamine Patch. Resident #82 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #82 was discharged to the hospital on [DATE] and readmitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnosis included but were not limited to, Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus without complications, contracture, unspecified joint and Cerebral infarction due to unspecified occlusion or stenosis if unspecified cerebral artery. Resident #82's Minimum Data Set (an assessment protocol) with an Assessment Reference Date of 03/10/2021 was coded with short-term memory problems, long-term memory problems and with moderately impaired cognitive skills for daily decision making. In addition,…
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 · D2021-04-01 · tag F0745 — failed to provide medically-related social services — isolatedProvide medically-related social services to help each resident achieve the highest possible quality of life.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, resident interviews, staff interviews, clinical record review, and a review of the facility's policy, the facility staff failed to ensure medically related social services to include resident's appointments and assessments were provided for 4 of 42 residents in the survey sample, Resident #57, #453, #457, and #456. The findings included: 1. The facility staff failed to ensure medically related social services needs were met; such as providing dental appointments in a timely manner for Resident #57. Resident #57 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] after an acute care hospital stay. The current diagnoses included; Diabetes Mellitus due to underlying condition with Diabetes Mono-neuropathy and Essential Hypertension. A Quarterly revision, Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 02/19/21 coded the resident as completing the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) and scoring 15 out of a possible 15. This indicated…
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 · D2021-04-01 · tag F0791 — failed to provide routine dental services — isolatedProvide or obtain dental services for each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, resident interviews, staff interviews, clinical record review, and a review of the facility's policy, the facility staff failed to ensure one resident receive the services needed to meet their dental needs for 1 out of 40 residents (Resident #57), in the survey sample. The findings included: Resident #57 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] after an acute care hospital stay. The current diagnoses included; Diabetes Mellitus due to underlying condition with Diabetes Mononeuropathy and Essential Hypertension. A Quarterly revision, Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 02/19/21 coded the resident as completing the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) and scoring 15 out of a possible 15. This indicated Resident #57 cognitive abilities for daily decision making were intact. In Section G (Physical functioning) the resident was coded as requiring extensive assistance of one person with transfers, bed mobility,…
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 · E2019-05-01 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — patternHonor 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
Based on observation and staff interview it was determined that facility staff failed to provide a dignified dining experience for five of 42 residents in the survey sample; Resident #33, #20, #2, #7 and #58 in the activity room on unit one. Facility staff failed to provide Resident #33 a dignified dining experience during dinner on 4/28/19; and failed to provide Residents #20, #2, #7 and #58 a dignified dining experience for lunch on 4/30/19 in the activity room on unit one. The findings include: On 4/28/19 at 5:39 p.m., observation of dining in the activity room was conducted. Four residents were observed sitting in the activity room waiting for their meals. On 4/28/19 at 5:46 p.m., three residents were served their meals. The fourth resident (Resident #33) did not have her tray at this time. On 4/28/19 at 5:50 p.m., an aide brought in a fifth resident into the activity room for his meal. On 4/29/18 at 5:55 p.m., Resident #33 still did not have her meal. Resident #33 appeared very agitated and stated, I am so hungry. On 4/28/19 at 5:59 p.m., the fifth resident was given his meal.…
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 · E2019-05-01 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and staff interview, facility staff failed to provide a homelike environment during the dining observation on two separate occasions on 4/28/19 and 4/30/19 in the activity room of unit one. Facility staff served resident meals on trays during the dining observation in the unit one activity room for dinner on 4/28/19 and for lunch on 4/30/19. The findings include: On 4/28/19 at 5:39 p.m., observation of dining in the activity room was conducted. Four residents were observed sitting in the activity room waiting for their meals. On 4/28/19 at 5:46 p.m., three residents were served their meals. Their meals were served on trays. On 4/28/19 at 5:50 p.m., an aide brought in a fifth resident into the activity room for his meal. On 4/28/19 at 5:59 p.m., the fifth resident was given his meal. His meal was served on a tray. On 4/28/19 at 6:04 p.m., the fourth received her meal. Her meal was removed from the tray. On 4/30/19 at 11:21 a.m., an interview was conducted with CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) #2. When asked how to maintain a homelike environment in the dining…
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 · E2019-05-01 · tag F0622 — patternNot transfer or discharge a resident without an adequate reason; and must provide documentation and convey specific information when a resident is transferred or discharged.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interviews, clinical record review and facility documentation review the facility staff failed to send a copy of the Resident's Care Plan to include their goals for 3 of 42 residents (Resident #73, 32, and 70) after being transferred to the hospital. 1. The facility staff failed to ensure that Resident #73's Plan of Care Summary to include their care plan goals was sent upon transfer/discharge to the hospital on [DATE]. 2. For Resident #32, facility staff failed to evidence that all required documentation was sent with the resident upon transfer to the hospital for a facility-initiated transfer on 2/9/19. 3. For Resident #70, the facility staff failed to include in the transfer summary indication that the facility staff conveyed to the receiving providers the resident's comprehensive care plan goals at the time of discharge to the local hospital on 6/1/18, 6/3/18, 10/5/18 and 12/21/18 or as soon as possible to the actual time of transfer. The findings included: 1. Resident #73 was originally…
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 before2019-05-01 · tag F0625 — patternNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interviews, facility documentation review and clinical record review the facility staff failed send a copy of the Bed-Hold Policy for 3 of 42 residents (Resident #73, 32 and 70) after being transferred to the hospital. 1. The facility staff failed to issue the resident/representative with a written copy of bed hold policy for Resident #73. Resident #73 went to his doctor's appointment and was transferred to the local hospital and admitted on [DATE]. 2. Facility staff failed to evidence that written bed hold notification was provided to the resident/responsible party at the time of a facility initiated transfer to the hospital on 2/9/19. 3. The facility staff failed to ensure Resident #70 or Resident Representative (RR) was issued a written notice of the bed hold reserve policy upon transfer to the local hospital on 6/1/18, 6/3/18, 10/5/18 and on 12/21/18. The findings included: 1. Resident #73 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident was re-admitted to the facility on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2019-05-01 · 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 observations, clinical record review, staff interviews and facility documentation, the facility staff failed to ensure a Level II PASRR (Preadmission Screening and Resident Review) was conducted for 2 of 40 residents (Resident #18 and #32) in the survey sample with diagnoses of either a mental disorder and or intellectual disability. 1. The facility staff failed to ensure Resident #18, who was identified with a mental illness and had a Level I PASRR screening with recommendation for a Level II assessment, had the Level II conducted per standard protocol. 2. The facility staff failed to ensure a Level II PASRR was completed for Resident #32. The findings include: 1. Resident #18 was admitted to the nursing facility on 3/4/17 with diagnoses that included obsessive compulsive personality disorder and major depressive disorder. The most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment was a quarterly assessment dated [DATE] and coded the resident with a score of score of 13 out of a possible score of 15 the Brief…
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 before2019-05-01 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — patternDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview, clinical record review and facility document review, it was determined that facility staff failed to review and revise the care plan for five (5) of 42 residents in the survey sample, Resident # 71, #58, #32, #6 and #73. 1. For Resident #71, facility staff failed to revise the care plan when she was diagnosed with MRSA (Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus) in her sputum. 2. For Resident #58, facility staff failed to revise the care plan when she was diagnosed with pneumonia and receiving antibiotic therapy. 3. For Resident #32, facility staff failed to revise the care plan when a stage II pressure ulcer was found to her right hip; and a wound from trauma was found to her left lateral ankle on 4/2/19. 4. For Resident #6, the facility staff failed to revise the person centered care plan to include a Deep Tissue Injury (DTI), pressure ulcer to the right heel. 5. For Resident #73, the facility staff failed to revise the person centered care plan to include contact precaution and 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 · E2019-05-01 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — patternProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on resident interview, staff interviews and clinical record review the facility staff failed to provide personal care to include showers for one resident in the survey sample (Resident #62) who was unable to independently carry out activities of daily living (ADL's). The facility staff failed to ensure Resident #62 was offered and received scheduled twice-weekly showers to maintain good personal hygiene. The findings included: Resident #62 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnosis for Resident #62 included but not limited to Difficulty waking and Muscle weakness. Resident #62's Minimum Data Set (an assessment protocol) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 04/01/19 coded the resident's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score 15 of a possible 15 with no cognitive impairment. In addition, the MDS coded Resident #62 requiring extensive assistance of one with toilet use, limited assistance of one with transfer, dressing, hygiene, bed mobility and bathing with Activities of Daily Living…
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 · E2019-05-01 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — patternProvide 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 resident interview, staff interviews, clinical record review and facility documentation review the facility staff failed to communicate ongoing assessments for Resident #73 for the monitoring of complications after dialysis treatment. The facility staff failed to ensure ongoing communication and assessments with the dialysis center for Resident #73 who attended an outpatient dialysis three days per week every Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday. The findings included: Resident #73 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnosis included but not limited to *End Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) (Chronic irreversible kidney failure). The resident was receiving *hemodialysis treatments three times a week every Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday. The current Minimum Data Set (MDS) a significant change assessment, with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 04/9/19 coded the resident with a 15 out of a possible score of 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS), indicating no cognitive impairment. In…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2019-05-01 · 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, resident interview, staff interview, clinical record review, and review of the facility's policy the facility staff failed to acquire medications needed to meet each resident's needs for 1 of 42 residents (Resident #44), in the survey sample. The facility's staff failed to obtain Nystatin ointment (an antifungal) ordered for Resident #44 on 4/22/19. The findings included: Resident #44 was admitted to the nursing facility on 5/3/17, and re-admitted to the facility on [DATE], after an acute hospital stay. The current diagnoses included heart failure and asthma. Resident #44's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 3/15/19, coded the resident as completing the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) and scoring 14 out of a possible 15. This indicated Resident #44's cognitive abilities for daily decision making were intact. The 3/15/19, MDS was coded for no mood or behavior problems. In section G (Physical functioning) the resident was coded as…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2019-05-01 · 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, staff interview, clinical record review and facility document review, it was determined that facility staff failed to follow infection control practices for three of 42 residents in the survey sample, Resident # 229, #71, and #58; and the facility staff failed to ensure they followed infection control practices to prevent the possible transmission of infection and disease on 2 of 2 facility nursing units. 1. For Resident #229, facility staff failed to wear the appropriate PPE (Personal Protective Equipment) while she was on contact precautions on 4/28/19 and had the wrong precaution sign on the resident's door. 2. For Resident #71, facility staff failed to wear the appropriate PPE while she was on droplet precautions on 4/29/19 and had the wrong precaution sign on the resident's door. 3. For Resident #58, facility staff failed to maintain oxygen equipment in a sanitary manner. 4. On Unit I, the facility staff facility staff failed to disinfect the glucose monitoring machine before and after…
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 · D2019-05-01 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, resident interview, staff interview, facility documentation review, clinical record review, the facility staff failed to notify pertinent individuals of a change in condition for 1 of 42 Residents (Resident #30), in a survey sample. The facility staff failed to notify the physician and Responsible Party of Resident #30's open areas on the right lower extremity. The findings included: Resident #30 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Diagnoses for Resident #30 included but not limited to Diabetes Mellitus, Hypertension, and Cerebral Vascular Incident, dementia and Xerosis Cutis. Resident #30's Quarterly Minimum Data Set with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 7/02/18 coded Resident #30 as having short term and long term memory problems. With cognitive skills indicating a severe cognitive impairment. In section G (Physical functioning) the resident was coded as being totally dependent with eating, locomotion, dressing, personal hygiene, bathing, bed mobility,…
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 · D2019-05-01 · tag F0582 — isolatedGive residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on clinical record review, staff interviews and facility documentation, the facility staff failed to ensure Medicare Beneficiary Notices in accordance with applicable Federal regulations, were issued to 1 of 3 residents (Resident #68) in the survey sample. The facility staff failed to issue an Advanced Beneficiary Notice (ABN) letter to Resident #68. Resident #68 was discharged from skilled services who remained in the facility with Medicare days remaining. The findings included: Resident #68 was admitted to the nursing facility on 03/06/19 with a diagnosis included but not limited to Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS). The Minimum Data Set (MDS-an assessment protocol) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 04/04/19 coded the resident with a 12 out of a possible score of 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS), which indicated moderate cognitive impairment. On review of the Beneficiary Notification Checklists provided by the facility to surveyor, Resident #68 was not listed for having been issued the SNF ABN (Skilled Nursing Facility-Advanced Beneficiary…
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 · D2019-05-01 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolatedKeep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
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 during wound care and staff interviews the facility staff failed to assure privacy was maintained during the provision of care for 1 of 42 residents (Resident #67), in the survey sample. The facility staff failed to pull the privacy curtain to obscure Resident #67 from view while providing wound care and failed to wait for a response after knocking on the door before entering. The findings included: Resident #67 was originally admitted to the facility 03/10/16 and readmitted on [DATE]. The current diagnoses included; Multiple Sclerosis, Major Depressive Disorder, Diabetes Mellitus, Pressure Ulcers. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) Quarterly revision showed an assessment reference date (ARD) of 09/02/18 coded the resident as completing the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) and scoring 15. This indicated Resident #67's cognitive abilities for daily decision making were intact. In section G (Physical functioning) the resident was coded as being independent requiring set up help only 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 · Dcited before2019-05-01 · 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
Based on staff interviews, clinical record review and facility documentation the facility staff develop a comprehensive personal centered care plan for 1 of 42 residents (Resident #6) in the survey sample. The facility staff failed to develop a person-centered care plan to include the diagnosis of depression with the use of a psychoactive medication (*Zoloft). The findings included: Resident #6 was originally admitted to the nursing facility on 02/08/18. Diagnosis for Resident #6 included but was not limited to *Depressive Disorder. The current Minimum Data Set (MDS) was a significant change assessment with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 01/17/19. The MDS coded the resident with short and long-term memory problems and cognitive skills severely impaired-never/rarely made decisions. The residents MDS was coded for the usage of antidepressant medication. Section N on the MDS under medications read as follows: Indicate the number of DAYS the resident receiving the medication during the last 7 days, the resident was coded for receiving an antidepressant for 7 days. The 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 · D2019-05-01 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, clinical record review and facility documentation the facility staff failed for one (Resident #109) of 14 residents in the survey sample, to follow professional standards of care for medication administration. The facility staff failed to administer medication to Resident #109 per physician's order on 06/17/2019 and failed to document attempts to acquire the medication. The findings included: Resident #109 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included but were not limited to, Huntington's Disease (1) and Psychotic Disorder. Resident #109's Minimum Data Set (an assessment protocol) with an Assessment Reference Date of 05/27/2019 coded the resident with a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) score of 14 out of 15 indicating no cognitive impairment. In addition, the Minimum Data Set coded Resident #109 as requiring no assistance with bed mobility, transfer and eating, supervision with eating and total dependence of 1 with bathing. On 06/19/2019, the NON-PRN…
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 · D2019-05-01 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — isolatedHave 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 observation, staff interview, and facility document review, the facility staff failed to ensure there was Registered Nurse (RN) coverage for 8 hours, 7 days a week. The facility staff failed to ensure there was RN coverage for 8 hours on 3/2/19. The findings included: On 05/01/19 at approximately 2:30 PM, the facility's actual worked schedule was reviewed and revealed there was no RN coverage for 03/02/2019. On 05/01/19 at approximately 2:39 PM, an interview was conducted with the Operations Coordinator. She was asked to explain the RN weekend schedule. She stated that RN's (Registered Nurses) are hired for weekend coverage. If no one is here we ensure that we have RN coverage. She was asked if RN on call coverage suffices for RNs not being in the building? She replied no! She also stated that the Registered Nurse scheduled to come in on 03/02/19 on the 7:00 PM -7:00 AM shift called out, and there was not an on call Registered Nurse that could be reached by phone. On 05/01/19 at approximately 5:06 PM an interview was conducted with The Director of Nursing (DON) and 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 · D2019-05-01 · 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 clinical record review and staff interviews the facility staff failed to ensure that the medication irregularities identified by the Pharmacist during the Drug Regimen Review were acted upon for 1 of 42 residents (Resident #47) in the survey sample. The facility staff failed to ensure medication irregularities identified by the Pharmacist during the Drug Regimen Review were acted upon for Resident #47. The findings included: Resident #47 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included but were not limited to, Heart Failure and Diabetes Mellitus. Resident #47's Minimum Data Set (MDS- an assessment protocol) with an Assessment Reference Date of 03/18/2019 was coded with a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) score of 15 indicating no cognitive impairment. In addition, the Minimum Data Set coded Resident #47 as requiring limited assistance of 1 with activities of daily living. Resident #47's Clinical Record was reviewed on 04/29/2019 and the Physician's Order Sheet revealed a medication…
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 · D2019-05-01 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and inspection of 1 of 2 medication rooms (Unit II), the facility staff failed to ensure provision of a separately locked, permanently affixed compartment for the storage of controlled drugs or drugs subject to abuse. The findings include: On 4/29/19 at 11:15 a.m., the medication room on Unit II was inspected with the assistance of Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #8. Upon entry, the door to the medication room was locked. The refrigerator was not locked and a small 8 inch by 5 inch metal box sat on the bottom shelf that was lifted out and sat on the counter. The items in the box included three 30 milliliters (ml) boxes of 2 milligram (mg) per ml *Ativan/ Lorazepam. This LPN did not recognize that the drugs were not double locked and that the metal box was not affixed and could be easily removed from the medication room. A Registered Nurse (RN) #3 entered the room and stated, There were screws that secured the box in the refrigerator. I will take care of that right now! *Lorazepam belongs to a class of drugs known as benzodiazepines which is a schedule IV…
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 · D2019-05-01 · tag F0868 — isolatedHave the Quality Assessment and Assurance group have the required members and meet at least quarterly
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interview, facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to ensure the Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) committee met at least quarterly and the required members attended. The facility staff failed to consistently have the required members at each quarterly Quality Assessment and Assurance Committee (QAA) meeting and failed to meet on a quarterly basis for one year. The findings included: On 05/01/19 at approximately 1:11 p.m., the Quality Assurance (QA) review was conducted with the Administrator. The surveyor requested the QAPI (QA Performance Improvement) meeting sign-in sheets for the last 4 quarters. The Administrator stated, I searched prior to this meeting for the QAPI sign-in-sheets but could only locate sign-in-sheets for 03/27/19 and 09/27/18. She stated, I'm not sure where the previous Administrator could have put the sign-in-sheets but they should be in the QA book. The Administrator started going through the QA book then stated, You can tell the meetings was held because the QA paperwork is here. The surveyor asked, Do you have 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.
- No harm found · Bcited before2019-05-01 · tag F0623 — patternProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on resident record review, staff interviews and facility document review, the facility failed to notify the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman in writing of hospital discharges for 3 of 42 residents (Resident #73, 32, and 70) after being transferred to the hospital. 1. The facility staff failed to notify the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman of Resident #73's discharge and admission to the hospital on [DATE]. 2. For Resident #32, facility staff failed to evidence that the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsmen received written notification that the resident was sent to the hospital on 2/9/19. 3. The facility staff failed to notify the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman of Resident #70's discharges to the hospital/emergency room on 6/1/18, 6/3/18, 10/5/18 and on 12/21/18. The findings included: 1. Resident #73 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident was re-admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnosis for Resident #73 included but not limited to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“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
$8,018 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $8,018 — penalty dated 2024-08-01
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 SABER HEALTHCARE GROUP — 126 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 3 of 5 | 2.9 | +0.1 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 2.6 | -0.6 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 2.2 | -0.2 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.0 | +1.0 vs chain |
The other 125 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.9★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 125; lowest-rated first.
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| WWBV HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 09/30/2019 |
| SPARLING, JAMES | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 01/09/2021 |
| SPELLER, KEN | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 02/23/2021 |
| VOLPE, BENJAMIN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 07/01/2019 |
| WEISBERG, WILLIAM | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 07/01/2019 |
| NICOLUZAKIS, GREGORY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 07/01/2019 |
| SABER GOVERNANCE LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 09/01/2019 |
| DUMBRA, VICTORIA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 11/01/2019 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 10 rows in the source record cover these 8 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
2 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $1.3M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 12% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in VA
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 Virginia 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 495201. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-12-12, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.