Our Lady Of Hope Health Center
13700 North Gayton Road, Richmond, VA 23233 · Non profit - Church related · 75 certified beds · (804) 360-1960 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607, F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (34) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (67%) runs well above the national median (45%)
- its last standard health inspection was over 3 years ago — the star rating may not reflect current conditions
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 | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 2 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 2 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 1 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 3 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 5 to 4 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 | 17.5% | 14.9% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 8.7% | 5.4% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 1.0% | 0.4% | 0.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 8.4% | 1.6% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 18.7% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star 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 | 6.0% | 3.6% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 11.3% | 20.6% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 83.3% | 94.0% | 95.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 9.5% | 4.7% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 20.4% | 21.8% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 14.8% | 14.2% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.6% | 1.3% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 85.0% | 73.6% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 26.7% | 22.3% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 15.4% | 11.5% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.70 | 1.52 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.85 | 1.48 | 1.80 | typical |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
§ 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.
68.5% 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 470 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 65.8% 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 231 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 0.77 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 94% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 10% 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 | 68.5%CMS range 64.9–71.9 | 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 | 11.5%CMS range 9.1–14.3 | 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 | 65.8% | 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 | 59.3% | 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 | 58.4% | 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 | 91.5% | 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 | 100.0% | 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 | 100.0% | 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 | 0.6% | 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 | 4.5% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.0%CMS range 4.7–9.2 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.07 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 75 beds and averages 72.4 residents a day — about 97% occupied, or roughly 3 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.19 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.40 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.34 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.79 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.35 on weekdays — 13% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.42 to 0.37 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 67% is well above 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.
This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 3 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.
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.
34 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 24 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · D2026-06-10 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on resident interview, staff interviews, facility document review and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to acquire medications for administration for one of nine residents in the survey sample, Resident #103The findings include: For R103 the facility staff failed to administer the physician ordered medication Fish Oil Oral Capsule (supplement) on 6/2/26 and 6/7/26. A review of R103's clinical record revealed a physician's order dated 4/8/26 for Fish Oil Oral Capsule 1000 MG (milligrams) one time a day for supplement. A review of R103's June 2026 MAR (medication administration record) revealed the same physician's order for Fish Oil Oral capsule. On 6/2/26 and 6/7/26, the MAR documented the code, 9=Other/See Progress Notes. Nurses' notes dated 6/2/26 and 6/7/23 documented, Medication not available. A review of the facility backup medication supply list revealed it was not stocked in supply. An interview was conducted on 6/8/26 at 11:30 AM with R103 who stated, there is a problem with me receiving my medications here, I just don't understand it. The most recent…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-17 · 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 observations, resident interview, staff interview and facility document review, the facility staff failed to follow professional standards of practice for one of eight residents in the medication administration observation and for one of 37 residents in the survey sample, Residents #65 and #78. The findings include:1. For Resident #65 (R65), the LPN (licensed practical nurse) #2 opened an extended-release (1) capsule of Tolterodine Tartrate (2) before administering the medication. R65 was admitted to the facility with diagnosis that included but not limited to an overactive bladder. On the most recent comprehensive MDS (minimum data set), a quarterly assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 02/10/2026, R65 scored 6 (six) out of 15 on the BIMS (brief interview for mental status), indicating R65 was severely impaired of cognition for making daily decisions. On 04/15/2026 at approximately 8:38 a.m. an observation during the facility's medication administration observation, revealed LPN #2…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-17 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview, clinical record review and facility document review, it was determined the facility staff failed to provide complete and accurate documentation for two of 37 residents, Resident #78 and #75. The findings include: The facility failed to document Tramadol administered according to scheduled doses and differing from documented narcotic pull times for Resident #78.Resident #78 (R78) was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis that included but were not limited to chronic pain, spondylosis, bipolar disorder, anxiety disorder and diabetes mellitus. The most recent MDS (minimum data set) assessment, a Medicare 5-day assessment, with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 4/13/26, 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 moderate assist for bed mobility, transfer, hygiene and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-12-06 · 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 clinical record review, staff interview and facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to implement the comprehensive care plan for one of eight residents in the survey sample, Resident #6. The findings include: For Resident #6 (R6), the facility staff failed to implement the comprehensive care plan to provide treatment to a pressure injury (1). On the most recent MDS (minimum data set), an admission assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 10/28/24, the resident was assessed as having one unstageable deep tissue injury (2) that was not present on admission. The comprehensive care plan for R6 documented in part, Problem Start Date: 10/29/2024. I am at risk for pressure ulcers/impaired skin integrity due to: open lesion to the finger from ruptured gout nodule, incontinence, impaired mobility, skin tear to LLE (left lower extremity), edema, fragile skin due to fluid accumulation, right heel DTI (deep tissue injury). Edited: 10/31/2024. Under Approach it documented in part, .Treatment as ordered. Created: 10/29/2024 . The progress…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-12-06 · 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
Based on clinical record review, staff interview and facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to provide care and services to promote healing of a pressure injury for one of eight residents in the survey sample, Resident #6. The findings include: For Resident #6 (R6), the facility staff failed to evidence a treatment for a facility acquired deep tissue injury (1) first observed on 10/28/24 until 11/4/24. On the most recent MDS (minimum data set), an admission assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 10/28/24, the resident was assessed as having one unstageable deep tissue injury that was not present on admission. The progress notes for R6 documented in part, - 10/28/2024 02:00 pm (Recorded as late entry on 11/01/2024 02:01 pm) DTI observed by therapy and was overheard speaking to son about floating resident's heal [sic] and possibly ordering bilateral heal [sic] protector boots. This writer was told and assessed the resident. It was noted that resident had DTI on right heal [sic] measuring 3.5x5.5cm (centimeter). Nurse made aware, and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-12-06 · 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 clinical record review, staff interview and facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to report and follow post fall procedures for one of eight residents in the survey sample, Resident #8. The findings include: For Resident #8 (R8), the facility staff failed to report a fall that occurred on evening shift 8/28/24. There was no documentation completed until 9/2/24 after the resident was discovered to have a fractured femur (1) and an investigation for the injury was started. R8 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included but were not limited to multiple fractures of pelvis, repeated falls, disorders of bone density and structure, and protein-calorie malnutrition (2). On the most recent MDS (minimum data set), a 5-day assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 9/19/24, the resident was assessed as having one fall with fracture in the past month. The nursing progress notes documented in part, - 08/28/2024 08:23 pm (Recorded as Late Entry on 09/02/2024 08:33 pm). Resident was noted on the bathroom floor at the last…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-09-27 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility failed to implement their abuse policy for investigating and reporting an allegation of abuse when reported to the facility staff for one of eight residents in the survey sample, Resident #1. The findings include: For Resident #1 (R1), the facility staff failed to implement their abuse policy to investigate and report an allegation of abuse that was reported to the executive director via email on 9/22/2023. The facility policy Right to Dignity Freedom from Abuse Neglect and Exploitation revised 2/13/2023 documented in part, . The Administrator or designee will immediately make an oral or written report of the allegation or of the first suspicion of abuse to the local social services department, to the adult protective services unit and to other agencies in accordance with established procedures. All alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source, and misappropriation of resident's property, are reported…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-27 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility failed to report an allegation of abuse to the State Agency for one of eight residents in the survey sample, Resident #1. The findings include: For Resident #1 (R1), the facility staff failed to report an allegation of abuse to the State Agency that had been reported to the executive director via email on 9/22/2023. On the most recent MDS (minimum data set), an admission assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 8/25/2023, the resident scored 12 out of 15 on the BIMS (brief interview for mental status) assessment, indicating the resident was moderately impaired for making daily decisions. R1 no longer resided at the facility and could not be observed during the survey dates. The record was reviewed as a closed record. Review of the facility synopsis of events from 4/1/2023 through the present failed to evidence any events for R1. Review of R1's clinical record failed to evidence documentation of allegations of abuse by R1 or R1's family. On 9/27/2023 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 · Dcited before2023-09-27 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on clinical record review, staff interview and facility document review, it was determined the facility staff failed to review and revise the care plan for one of eight residents in the survey sample, Resident #1. The findings include: For Resident #1 (R1), the facility staff failed to review and revise the comprehensive care plan to evidence resident-centered preferences for care. On the most recent MDS (minimum data set) assessment, an admission assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 8/25/2023, the resident scored 12 of 15 on the BIMS (brief interview for mental status) assessment, indicating the resident was moderately impaired for making daily decisions. Section G documented R1 requiring extensive assistance of one person for dressing, bathing and personal hygiene and extensive assistance of two persons for toileting. The comprehensive care plan for R1 documented in part, Problem Start Date: 08/28/2023. Category: ADLs (activities of daily living) Functional Status/Rehabilitation Potential. I have alteration in ADL function due to weakness associated 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 · D2023-09-27 · tag F0711 — isolatedEnsure the resident's doctor reviews the resident's care, writes, signs and dates progress notes and orders, at each required visit.
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 and clinical record review, it was determined that the physician failed to write, sign and date a progress note during a visit for one of eight residents in the survey sample; Resident #2. The findings include: Resident #2 was most recently admitted on [DATE] and discharged to home on 8/3/23. The resident had diagnoses of, but not limited to, high blood pressure and atrial fibrillation (a-fib). The resident was coded on the most recent MDS (Minimum Data Set), an admission assessment dated [DATE] coded the resident as being cognitively intact in ability to make daily life decisions, scoring a 13 out of a possible 15 on the BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status). A review of the clinical record revealed the resident was admitted on [DATE]. The hospital discharge orders included Metoprolol Tartrate 100 mg (milligrams) twice daily (1). admission orders to the facility dated 6/30/23 included Metoprolol Tartrate 100 mg, twice daily. A review of the clinical record revealed blood pressure…
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 24 citations
- Potential for harm · D2023-05-03 · 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
Based on observation, resident interview, staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to assess one of 28 residents in the survey sample for self-administration of medication, Resident #41. The findings include: For Resident #41 (R41), two bottles of diabetic Tussin (1) liquid medication and two bottles of Systane (2) lubricant eye drops were observed at the bedside in R41's room unsecured. On the most recent MDS (minimum data set), a significant change assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 4/14/2023, the resident scored 11 out of 15 on the BIMS (brief interview for mental status), indicating the resident was moderately impaired for making daily decisions. On 5/2/2023 at 10:14 a.m., an observation of R41's room was conducted. Two bottles of diabetic Tussin liquid medication were observed on a corner shelf storage rack, one four ounce bottle was observed to be unopened and one 8 ounce bottle was observed to be approximately three-quarters full. Two bottles of Systane lubricant eye drops were…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-05-03 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolatedHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview, clinical record review, and facility documentation review, it was determined that the facility failed to promote and facilitate the resident's right to self-determination by promoting resident's choice in desired bedtime for one of 28 residents in the survey sample, Resident #23. The findings included: For Resident #23, the facility staff failed to promote the resident's desired bedtime. Resident #23 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis that included but were not limited to: right lower leg fracture, DM (diabetes mellitus) and depression. The most recent MDS (minimum data set) assessment, a Medicare 5-day assessment, with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 3/20/23, 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 G-functional status coded the resident as requiring limited assistance for bed mobility, transfer, walking, locomotion,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-05-03 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interview and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to maintain an accurate MDS (minimum data set) assessment for one of 28 residents in the survey sample, Resident #29. The findings include: For Resident #29 (R29), the facility staff failed to code the quarterly MDS assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 2/27/2023 for hospice services received during the assessment period. Review of the clinical record for R29 revealed the most recent MDS assessment to be a quarterly MDS with an ARD of 2/27/2023. Section O of the assessment failed to document R29 receiving hospice services during the assessment period. The physician orders for R29 documented in part, Admit to [Name of hospice] for Alzheimer's disease. Order Date: 11/24/2022. The comprehensive care plan for R29 failed to evidence a care plan related to hospice services. On 5/2/2023 at 1:45 p.m., an interview was conducted with RN (registered nurse) #2, MDS coordinator. RN #2 stated that they used the RAI (resident assessment instrument) manual when completing the MDS…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-05-03 · 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 interview and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to develop the comprehensive care plan for one of 28 residents in the survey sample, Resident #29. The findings include: For Resident #29 (R29), the facility staff failed to develop the comprehensive care plan to include hospice services. Review of the clinical record for R29 revealed the most recent MDS assessment to be a quarterly MDS with an ARD of 2/27/2023. Section O of the assessment failed to document R29 receiving hospice services during the assessment period. The physician orders for R29 documented in part, Admit to [Name of hospice] for Alzheimer's disease. Order Date: 11/24/2022. Review of the comprehensive care plan for R29 failed to evidence a care plan related to hospice services. The progress notes for R29 documented in part, 2/13/2023 3:21 p.m. Resident currently on hospice, denies pain or discomfort at this time. Will continue to monitor and treat per provider orders. The progress notes further documented, 2/27/2023 10:45 a.m. MDS Quarterly - (Name of R29) is a LTC…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-05-03 · 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, resident interview, staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to secure medications in resident rooms for two of 28 residents in the survey sample, Resident #41 and Resident #35. The findings include: 1. For Resident #41 (R41), the facility staff failed to secure two bottles of diabetic Tussin (1) liquid medication and two bottles of Systane (2) lubricant eye drops were observed at the bedside in R41's room unsecured. On the most recent MDS (minimum data set), a significant change assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 4/14/2023, the resident scored 11 out of 15 on the BIMS (brief interview for mental status), indicating the resident was moderately impaired for making daily decisions. On 5/2/2023 at 10:14 a.m., an observation of R41's room was conducted. Two bottles of diabetic Tussin liquid medication were observed on a corner shelf storage rack, one four ounce bottle was observed to be unopened and one 8 ounce bottle was observed to be approximately three-quarters…
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 before2021-12-09 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, resident interview, clinical record review, facility document review and staff interview, it was determined facility staff failed to review the comprehensive care plan for one of 32 residents in the survey sample, Resident #28. On 11/14/21 Resident #28 sustained a fall. The residents comprehensive care plan was not reviewed or revised to address the residents 11/14/21 fall. The findings include: Resident #28 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included but were not limited to atrial fibrillation (1), pneumonia (2), and chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia (3). Resident #28's most recent MDS (minimum data set), a 5-day assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 12/03/2021, coded Resident #28 as scoring a 14 on the staff assessment for mental status (BIMS) of a score of 0 - 15, 14- being cognitively intact for making daily decisions. Section J of the assessment documented Resident #28 having a fall in the month prior to entry and no falls since admission/entry or reentry. On 12/7/2021 at approximately 11:30 a.m., an observation was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-12-09 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, resident interview, clinical record review, facility document review and staff interview, it was determined facility staff failed to store respiratory equipment in a sanitary manner for two of 32 residents in the survey sample, Resident #28 and Resident #62. The facility staff failed to store nebulizer equipment in a sanitary manner for Resident #28 and failed to store an incentive spirometer in a sanitary manner for Resident #62. The findings include: 1. The facility staff failed to store nebulizer (1) equipment in a sanitary manner for Resident #28. Resident #28 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included but were not limited to congestive heart failure (2) and chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia (3). Resident #28's most recent MDS (minimum data set), a 5-day assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 12/03/2021, coded Resident #28 as scoring a 14 on the staff assessment for mental status (BIMS) of a score of 0 - 15, 14- being cognitively intact for making…
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 before2021-12-09 · tag F0730 — isolatedObserve each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interview, facility document review, and employee record review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to ensure that training records reviewed included all the required annual training for one of 5 CNA [certified nursing assistant] records reviewed, CNA #1. The findings include: On 12/8/21 a review of 5 CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) training / education records were reviewed. CNA #1 was hired on 5/16/11 and her most recent completed anniversary year for training and education was 5/16/20 to 5/16/21. A review of CNA #1's training records for 5/16/20 to 5/16/21 failed to evidence that any abuse training was provided. On 12/08/21 at 2:19 PM, an interview was conducted with ASM #1 (Administrative Staff Member) the Executive Director. He stated that he looked everywhere and contacted the former Administrator and searched for any ad hoc abuse training. He stated that none was found. He stated that the facility does not have a training/education coordinator due to the facility being only a 75 bed facility. He stated that (ASM #2, the Director of Nursing)…
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 · D2021-12-09 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interview and facility document review, it was determined the facility staff failed to store, food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. The facility staff failed to dispose of expired food during the facility task- kitchen observation on 12/7/21 at 9:45 AM. The findings include: On 12/7/21 at 9:45 AM, an observation was conducted in the main kitchen dry storage room with OSM (other staff member) #3, the director of dining services. A 32-ounce bag of walnut halves and pieces was torn open and uncovered, with plastic wrap at the bottom of the bag. On the spice rack, there was a 20-ounce grape jelly jar, one third full, the jelly was at room temperature and the label on the bottle documented refrigerate after opening. An interview was conducted on 12/7/21 at 10:00 AM with OSM (other staff member) #3, the director of dining services. When asked if the walnuts should be opened, OSM #3 stated, No, they should be closed. It looks like someone was snacking. When asked about the grape jelly and the length of time out of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2020-02-27 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — widespreadDispose of garbage and refuse properly.
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 the facility staff failed to maintain the dumpster area in a clean and sanitary manner to prevent pests. Behind the three facility dumpsters, Styrofoam cups, three used gloves, one green and two blue were observed on the ground. Bits of trash were observed behind all three dumpsters The findings include: Observation was made of the three facility dumpsters was conducted on 2/27/2020 at 9:17 a.m., with OSM (other staff member) #3, the director of maintenance. Between two dumpsters, a puddle of spilled milk was observed on the ground. Behind the dumpsters, Styrofoam cups, three used gloves, one green and two blue were observed on the ground. There were bits of trash behind all three dumpsters. There were leaves and pine needles in the debris behind the dumpsters. When asked who is responsible for maintaining the area, OSM #3 stated ultimately, the grounds department. A copy of the policy for maintaining the dumpsters and dumpster area was requested. The facility policy titled, Dumpster Cleaning and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2020-02-27 · 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 resident interview, staff interview, family interview, facility document review, and clinical record review, it was determined the facility staff failed to implement the facility policies to meet the requirements for advanced directives for four of thirty-eight residents, (Residents #31, Resident #33, Resident #14 and Resident #45). The facility staff failed to evidence documentation of an annual review of the advanced directives and wishes with Resident #31 and/or the resident's responsible party (RP), Resident #33 and/or the residents RP, Resident #14 and /or the residents RP, and Resident #45 and/or the resident's responsible party. The findings include: 1. Resident #31 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #31's diagnoses included but were not limited to: Alzheimer's disease (progressive loss of mental ability and function) (1), chronic kidney disease (decreased function of the kidneys) (2) and hydronephrosis (distension of the kidney, caused by accumulation of urine that cannot flow out…
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 before2020-02-27 · 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, resident interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined the facility staff failed to review and revise the comprehensive care plan for five of thirty-eight residents in the survey sample, (Residents #17, #27, #55, #161, and #9). The facility staff failed to review and revise the comprehensive care plans for Resident #17, Resident # 27, Resident #55, Resident # 161 and Resident #9 to address and include the use of bed rails. The findings include: 1. Resident #17 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included but were not limited to: acute respiratory failure [inability of the heart and lungs to maintain an adequate level of gas exchange.] (1), atherosclerotic heart disease, [plaque consisting of cholesterol and lipids form on inner arterial walls of the heart.] (2); and pneumonia [inflammation of the lungs usually by bacterial infection.] (3). Resident #17's most recent MDS (minimum data set) assessment, an admission assessment,…
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 · E2020-02-27 · tag F0700 — patternTry different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, resident interview, staff interview, facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to implement bed rails requirements for eight of 38 residents in the survey, Residents #9, #14, #45, #161, #162, #17, #27, and #55. The facility staff failed to attempt appropriate alternatives prior to use, failed to assess for the risk of entrapment, failed to review risks and benefits and failed to obtained informed consent prior to the use of bed rails for Residents ##9, #14, #45, #161, #162, #17, #27, and #55. The findings include: 1. Resident #9 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included but were not limited to: fracture of her femur, high blood pressure, abnormalities of gait and mobility, and diabetes. The most recent MDS (minimum data set) assessment, a quarterly assessment, with an assessment reference date of 12/3/19, coded the resident as scoring a 12 on the BIMS (brief interview for mental status) score, indicating she was moderately impaired…
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 before2020-02-27 · tag F0730 — patternObserve each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interview and facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to complete annual CNA (certified nursing aide) performance reviews for seven of ten CNA employee records reviewed. The facility staff failed to complete annual performance reviews for CNA #1, CNA #2, CNA #3, CNA#4, CNA #5, CNA #6 and CNA #7. The findings include: The employee files of ten CNAs was completed and revealed the following: CNA #1 was hired on 10/11/05. Review of CNA #1's employee record revealed the last performance review was completed on 3/2/17. CNA #2 was hired on 6/13/17. Review of CNA #2's employee record revealed no performance review. CNA #3 was hired on 9/27/02. Review of CNA #3's employee record revealed no performance review. CNA #4 was hired on 5/16/11. Review of CNA #4's employee record revealed the last performance review was completed on 1/27/17. CNA #5 was hired on 8/22/18. Review of CNA #5's employee record revealed no performance review. CNA #6 was hired on 7/7/08. Review of CNA #6's employee record revealed the last performance review was completed…
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 · E2020-02-27 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined the facility staff failed to inspect beds to identify areas of possible entrapment for eight of 38 residents, Residents #9, #14, #45, #161, #162, #17, #27, and #55. The findings include: 1. Resident #9 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included but were not limited to: fracture of her femur, high blood pressure, abnormalities of gait and mobility, and diabetes. The most recent MDS (minimum data set) assessment, a quarterly assessment, with an assessment reference date of 12/3/19, coded the resident as scoring a 12 on the BIMS (brief interview for mental status) score, indicating she was moderately impaired to make daily cognitive decisions. In Section G - Functional Status, the resident was coded as requiring extensive assistance of one staff member for moving in the bed. On 2/25/2020, at 1:48 p.m., an observation and interview was conducted with Resident #9. The resident was in her bed 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 before2020-02-27 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interview and facility document review, it was determined the facility staff failed to implement their abuse policy for three of twenty-five employee record reviews, (CNA (certified nursing assistant) #8, LPN (licensed practical nurse) #5 and LPN #7). The facility failed to perform a timely criminal background check for CNA #8 and failed to obtain references for LPN #5 and LPN #7. The findings include: A review of twenty-five employee records revealed the following: - Review of the employee file for CNA #8 revealed a hire date of 4/17/19. Further review of the employee file failed to evidence documentation of a criminal background check for CNA #8. - Review of the employee file for LPN #5, revealed a hire date of 4/17/19. Further review of the employee file failed to reveal any reference checks at or before the date of hire. - Review of the employee file for LPN #7, revealed a hire date of 5/22/19. Further review of the employee file failed to reveal any reference checks at or before the date of hire. An interview was conducted on 2/27/20 at 8:07 AM with OSM (other…
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 · D2020-02-27 · tag F0622 — isolatedNot 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 interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined the facility staff failed to evidence transfer discharge requirements to the hospital for one of thirty-eight residents, Resident #31, when the resident was transferred to the hospital on 2/8/20. The findings include: Resident #31 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #31's diagnoses included but were not limited to: Alzheimer's disease (progressive loss of mental ability and function) (1), chronic kidney disease (decreased function of the kidneys) (2) and hydronephrosis (distension of the kidney, caused by accumulation of urine that cannot flow out due to an obstruction) (3). Resident #31's most recent MDS (minimum data set) assessment, a quarterly admission assessment, with an assessment reference date of 1/15/20, coded the resident as scoring 3 out of 15 on the BIMS (brief interview for mental status) score, indicating the resident was severely cognitively impaired. The resident was coded as requiring…
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 · D2020-02-27 · 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 Based on staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined the facility staff failed to provide written notification upon transfer for one of thirty-eight residents in the survey sample, Resident #31. The facility staff failed to provide written notice of the reason for transfer to Resident #31 and or to the resident responsible party, when Resident #31 was transferred to the hospital on 2/8/2020. The findings include: Resident #31 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #31's diagnoses included but were not limited to: Alzheimer's disease (progressive loss of mental ability and function) (1), chronic kidney disease (decreased function of the kidneys) (2) and hydronephrosis (distension of the kidney, caused by accumulation of urine that cannot flow out due to an obstruction) (3). Resident #31's most recent MDS (minimum data set) assessment, a quarterly admission assessment, with an assessment reference date of 1/15/2020, coded the resident as scoring 3 out of 15 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 · D2020-02-27 · tag F0645 — isolatedPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview, facility document review, and clinical record review, it was determined the facility staff failed to ensure a PASAAR (Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review) was completed prior to admission for two of 38 residents in the survey sample, (Residents #34 and #55). The facility staff failed to ensure a level I PASARR was completed for Resident #34 and Resident #55, to ensure the residents were evaluated and receiving care and services in the most integrated setting appropriate for the residents' needs. The findings include: Resident #34 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included but were not limited to: anxiety disorder, Bipolar disorder (a mental disorder characterized by episodes of mania and depression) (1), and major depressive disorder. The most recent MDS (minimum data set) assessment, a quarterly assessment, with an assessment reference date of 1/21/2020 coded the resident as scoring a 1 on her BIMS (brief interview for mental status) score, indicating…
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 · D2020-02-27 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to develop a complete baseline care plan for one of 38 residents in the survey sample, Resident #162. The facility staff failed to develop a baseline care plan to address Resident #162's use of bed rails. The findings include: Resident #162 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #162's diagnoses included but were not limited to diabetes, constipation and pulmonary fibrosis (a lung disease). Resident #162's admission MDS (minimum data set) assessment had not been completed yet at the time of the survey. An admission observation report dated 2/21/20 documented Resident #162 was alert and oriented to person, place, time and situation. Resident #162's baseline care plan with an admission date of 2/21/20 documented a section titled, Required Safety/Enablers measures. There was an option for side rails (bed rails); however, this option was not checked. On 2/25/20 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 · Dcited before2020-02-27 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, family interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to implement the comprehensive care plan for two of 38 residents in the survey sample, ((Residents #163 and #14). The facility staff failed to implement Resident #163's oxygen care plan and failed to implement the Resident # 14's comprehensive care plan for side rail protectors. During separate observations, Resident #14 was observed lying in bed with bilateral side rails up. One side rail was covered, the other rail was uncovered and the black side rail covering was observed on the floor under the resident's bed. The findings include: 1. Resident #163 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #163's diagnoses included but were not limited to respiratory failure, acute kidney failure and muscle weakness. Resident #163's quarterly MDS (minimum data set) with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 11/20/19, coded Resident #163's cognition as severely…
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 before2020-02-27 · 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
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 provide respiratory care and services for one of 38 residents in the survey sample, (Resident #163). The facility staff failed to administer oxygen to Resident #163 at the physician prescribed rate of three liters per minute. The findings include: Resident #163 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #163's diagnoses included but were not limited to respiratory failure, acute kidney failure and muscle weakness. Resident #163's quarterly MDS (minimum data set) with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 11/20/19, coded Resident #163's cognition as severely impaired. Section G coded the resident as requiring extensive assistance of one staff with bed mobility and personal hygiene. Section O coded Resident #163 as receiving oxygen therapy. Review of Resident #163's clinical record revealed a physician's order dated 2/19/20 for oxygen at three…
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 · D2020-02-27 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined the facility staff failed to ensure dialysis services, were provided consistent with professional standards of practice, and the comprehensive person-centered care plan, for one of 38 residents in the survey sample, Resident #55. The facility staff failed to evidence communication with the dialysis center and failed to have a contract with the dialysis center provider. The findings include: Resident #55 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #55's diagnoses included but were not limited to: pneumonia [inflammation of the lungs usually caused by an infection.] (1), bipolar disorder [mental disorder characterized by mania and depression.] (2); schizophrenia [mental disorder characterized by gross distortions of reality, disturbances of thought, language and perception.] (3) Resident #55's most recent MDS (minimum data set) assessment, an admission assessment, with an assessment reference date 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 · D2020-02-27 · tag F0947 — failed to train nurse aides adequately — isolatedEnsure nurse aides have the skills they need to care for residents, and give nurse aides education in dementia care and abuse prevention.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interview and facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to ensure required annual in-service training's for CNAs (certified nursing aides) was completed for three of ten CNA records reviewed, (CNAs #3, #5 and #7). The facility staff failed to ensure CNAs #3, #5 and #7 completed the required annual 12 hours of training, including dementia management training and resident abuse prevention training. The findings include: Review of the employee records for ten CNAs revealed the following: CNA #3 was hired on 9/27/02. Review of CNA #3's employee record failed to reveal any completed trainings. CNA #5 was hired on 8/22/18. Review of CNA #5's employee record failed to reveal any completed trainings. CNA #7 was hired on 11/7/18. Review of CNA #7's employee record failed to reveal any completed trainings. On 2/26/20 at 5:55 p.m., an interview was conducted with ASM (administrative staff member) #2 (the director of nursing). ASM #2 stated the facility staff utilizes an online training company that determines the types of trainings that must be…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| KNESTOUT, BARRY | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | 100% | since 12/05/2017 |
| BLUM, JONATHAN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/01/2025 |
| KRECK, MICHAEL | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/08/2025 |
| CATRAMBONE, JOSEPH | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/31/2024 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 13 rows in the source record cover these 4 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. 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, FY2024). 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 495311. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2023-05-03, 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.