Southampton Rehabilitation And Healthcare Center
7246 Forest Hill Ave, Richmond, VA 23225 · For profit - Partnership · 195 certified beds · (804) 320-7901 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- it has abuse, neglect, or exploitation citations (F0600, F0606) — most recent Feb 2024
- 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
- inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
- 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 (49) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $36,283 in federal fines (most recent 2026-02-06)
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
- about 30% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
- its last standard health inspection was over 5 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 | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 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 held steady at 2 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 5.5% | 14.9% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 8.1% | 5.4% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.4% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.3% | 1.6% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 75.6% | 18.7% | 6.5% | worse 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 | 1.5% | 3.6% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 7.2% | 15.6% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 12.9% | 20.6% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 81.8% | 94.0% | 95.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.6% | 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 | 10.1% | 14.2% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.6% | 1.3% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 58.9% | 73.6% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 18.8% | 22.3% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 15.7% | 11.5% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.37 | 1.52 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.63 | 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.
46.6% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 77 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 72.6% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 124 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 0.09 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 5% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 14% 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 | 46.6%CMS range 34.0–58.0 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 11.6%CMS range 8.7–16.3 | 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 | 72.6% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 80.7% | 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 | 63.7% | 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 | 65.9% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 83.3% | 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 | 71.4% | 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 | 1.4% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.5% | 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 | 9.1%CMS range 4.9–15.6 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.12 | 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 195 beds and averages 181.6 residents a day — about 93% occupied, or roughly 13 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 3.02 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.41 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.59 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 2.76 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.13 on weekdays — 12% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.51 to 0.18 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 52% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 5 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.
49 citations, most serious first. The 13 most serious are shown; the remaining 36 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2026-02-06 · tag F0627 — isolatedEnsure the transfer/discharge meets the resident's needs/preferences and that the resident is prepared for a safe transfer/discharge.
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 representative interview, staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to ensure a safe discharge to the community for two of three residents in the survey sample (Residents #1 and #2). Residents #1 and #2 were discharged to a lower level of care in the community without a documented basis for the discharge, a prior discharge plan, identification or verification of needed care/services, involvement of the interdisciplinary team, preparation/orientation for the residents and without involvement or consent from the legal guardian (for Resident #1). This resulted in the identification of immediately jeopardy regarding failure to provide a safe, appropriate discharge to the community.The findings include:1. Resident #1, residing in the nursing facility for over three years, was discharged to independent housing that provided no direct supervision, assistance with ADLs [activities of daily living] or medication administration. The facility…
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 · Gcited before2024-02-27 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on resident interview, staff interview, facility documentation review, and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to ensure freedom from abuse and neglect for one resident (Resident #1) in a survey sample of 8 residents. The findings included: For Resident #1, the facility staff failed to ensure the resident was not sexually abused by a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA)-B who was assigned to provide care for the resident's needs, and failed to report an allegation of abuse to the administrator timely. Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on with diagnoses that included but were not limited to: quadriplegia, C5-C7 (cervical spine 5-7) incomplete and dysthymic disorder. The most recent MDS (minimum data set) assessment was a Quarterly assessment with an ARD (Assessment Review Date) of 01/22/2024. The MDS coded Resident #1 with a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) score of 14 (of a possible 15 points) which indicated no cognitive impairment. Resident #1 required extensive assistance of staff persons with ADLs (activities of daily living). Review 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.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2018-10-04 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on Resident interview, staff interview, facility documentation and clinical record review the facility failed to ensure the environment was free of accident hazards for 1 Resident (Resident # 122) in a survey sample of 46 Residents resulting in harm. For Resident #122, the facility failed to provide a safe raised commode seat resulting in a fall requiring hospitalization for 3 fractured ribs. Resident #122, a [AGE] year old woman, was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of but not limited to Anemia, Hypertension, history of knee replacement, unsteady gait, Osteoarthritis, Chronic Pain, Low back Pain, Her most recent (Minimum Data Set) MDS (a screening tool) had the Resident coded as having a (Brief Interview of Mental Status) BIMS score of 15 indicating no cognitive impairment. Resident #122 was coded as needing physical assistance of 1 staff member for all transfers and toileting. On 10/3/18 a review of the clinical record for Resident # 122 was conducted and it was found that on 8/30/18 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 · D2026-02-06 · tag F0628 — isolatedProvide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
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 representative interview, staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to provide written notice to the resident's legal guardian of discharge to the community and failed to accurately document medication reconciliation prior to discharge for one of three residents in the survey sample (Resident #1).The findings include:Facility staff failed to provide written notice to Resident #1's court-appointed legal guardian prior to or at the time of the resident's discharge to the community on 9/30/25. The clinical record documented no rationale for the resident's discharge to a lower level of care. Resident #1's discharge summary did not document all medications the resident was to continue after discharge.Resident #1 (R1) was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included muscle wasting/atrophy, diabetes, magnesium deficiency, peripheral vascular disease, congestive heart failure, atrial fibrillation, anemia, major depressive disorder,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-06 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to review and revise the comprehensive care plan for two of three residents in the survey sample (Residents #1 and #2) and failed to ensure the interdisciplinary team conducted quarterly care plan reviews for one of three residents in the survey sample (Resident #1).The findings include: 1. Resident #1's care plan was not revised to include plans to discharge from the facility. Care plan review meetings for R1 were not conducted at the time of quarterly MDS assessments. Resident #1 (R1) was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included muscle wasting/atrophy, diabetes, magnesium deficiency, peripheral vascular disease, congestive heart failure, atrial fibrillation, anemia, major depressive disorder, hypertension, insomnia, affective mood disorder, atherosclerotic heart disease, cerebral infarction and vitamin deficiency. The minimum data set (MDS) dated [DATE] assessed R1 with 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 · D2026-02-06 · 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 resident representative interview, staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to provide medically related social services regarding discharge planning for two of three residents in the survey sample (Residents #1 and #2). The findings include:1. Facility staff failed to provide social services to ensure a safe discharge to the community for Resident #1 (R1). R1, residing in the nursing facility for over three years, was discharged to independent housing that provided no direct supervision, assistance with ADLs [activities of daily living] or medication administration. The social worker responsible for discharge planning failed to ensure a discharge plan of care was in place prior to the discharge that included goals, identification of the resident's care needs in the community, involvement of the interdisciplinary team and consent from the resident's legal guardian. The social worker referenced R1's discharge location as a group home and failed 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 · E2025-06-12 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — patternProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
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, the facility staff failed to implement a complete pain management program for one of 61 residents in the survey sample, Resident #317. The findings include: For Resident #317 (R317), the facility staff failed to attempt non-pharmacological interventions prior to the administration of PRN (as needed) tramadol (pain medication) on multiple dates in July 2024 and August 2024. A review of R317's clinical record revealed a physician's order dated 7/9/24 for tramadol 50mg (milligrams)-one tablet every six hours as needed for pain. A review of R317's July 2024 and August 2024 MARs (medication administration records) revealed the resident was administered PRN tramadol on 7/13/24, 7/17/24, 7/25/24, and 8/2/24. Further review of R317's clinical record (including the July 2024 and August 2024 MARs and nurses' notes) failed to reveal non-pharmacological interventions were offered/attempted prior to the administration of PRN tramadol on the above dates. On 6/12/25 at 10:24 a.m., an interview was conducted with RN…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-06-12 · 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
Based on staff interview, facility document review, and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to monitor residents to prevent unnecessary medication administration for two of 61 residents in the survey sample, Residents #317, and #118. The findings include: 1. For Resident #317 (R317), the facility staff failed to monitor the resident's blood pressure for the administration of the medication Midodrine (used to treat low blood pressure) on multiple dates in July 2024. A review of R317's clinical record revealed a physician's order dated 7/17/24 for Midodrine 10mg (milligrams)-one tablet by mouth every eight hours. Hold for systolic blood pressure greater than 140. The medication was scheduled for 6:00 a.m., 2:00 p.m., and 10:00 p.m. Further review of R317's clinical record (including the July 2024 medication administration record, July 2024 blood pressure summary, and July 2024 nurses' notes) failed to reveal the resident's blood pressure was obtained prior to Midodrine administration on the following dates: -7/19/24 for the 2:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. doses -7/20/24 for the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-06-12 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, resident interview, staff interview, clinical record review and facility document review, it was determined that facility staff failed to promote resident's dignity for two of 61 current residents in the survey sample, Residents #113 (R113) and R115. The findings include: 1. For R113, facility staff failed to allow person items to be placed on a shelf in front in the window of the resident's room. R113 was admitted to the facility with diagnosis that included but was not limited to major depressive disorder (1). On the most recent comprehensive MDS (minimum data set), a quarterly assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 06/02/2025, R113 scored 15 out of 15 on the BIMS (brief interview for mental status), indicating R113 was cognitively intact for making daily decisions. On 06/11/25 at approximately 7:51 a.m. an interview was conducted with R113. R113 stated that she was told by a staff member that she was not allowed to have anything sitting on a shelf, above the PTAC (packaged terminal air conditioner) unit (self-contained heating and air…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-06-12 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor 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, resident interview, staff interview, facility document review, and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to provide a comfortable and homelike environment for one of 61 residents in the survey sample, Resident #85. The findings include: For Resident #85 (R85) (a resident who resided on the third floor), the facility staff failed to provide enough linens for resident care. R85's annual MDS (minimum data set) assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 5/29/25 documented the resident scored 15 out of 15 on the BIMS (brief interview for mental status), indicating the resident was cognitively intact for making daily decisions. On 6/11/25 at 3:44 p.m., an interview was conducted with R85. The resident voiced concern that there were not enough linens for resident care. On 6/11/25 at 3:47 p.m., an interview was conducted with LPN (licensed practical nurse) #1 and CNA (certified nursing assistant) #12. CNA #12 stated a laundry aide delivers a linen cart for the 3:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. shift at approximately 3:15 p.m. and usually there is not…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-06-12 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — isolatedEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, resident interview, staff interview, facility document review, and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to honor a resident's food preferences/dislikes for one of 61 residents in the survey sample, Resident #14. The findings include: For Resident #14 (R14), the facility staff failed to honor the resident's dislike for grits. R14's annual MDS (minimum data set) assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 2/1/25 documented the resident scored 14 out of 15 on the BIMS (brief interview for mental status), indicating the resident was cognitively intact for making daily decisions. On 9/11/25 at 9:46 a.m., R14's breakfast tray was observed. R14's meal ticket documented the resident disliked grits. A bowl of grits was observed on R14's breakfast tray. R14 stated she receives food that she dislikes almost every day. On 6/12/25 at 8:42 a.m., an interview was conducted with OSM (other staff member) #10, the dietary district manager. OSM #10 stated that upon admission, the dietary staff talks to residents and obtains a list of their dislikes. OSM #10…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-11-07 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, clinical record review and facility documentation, the facility staff failed to develop and implement comprehensive resident centered care plan for 1 Resident (#5) in a survey sample of 5 Residents. The findings included: For Resident # 5 the facility staff failed to develop and implement a care plan that included interventions for preventing pressure ulcers. Resident #5 was admitted to the facility on 10/3 with diagnoses including but not limited to cerebral infarction due to unspecified cerebral artery, altered mental status, hypertension, gastro-esophageal reflux, hyperlipidemia, dementia, mood disturbance, anxiety degenerative disease of the nervous system, Type 2 diabetes, muscle wasting and atrophy cognitive communication deficit anemia and vitamin d deficiency. On 11/4/24 a review of the clinical record revealed that Resident #5 had mushy left heel noted during admission assessment and documented in the progress notes. No md notification or treatment orders 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 · Dcited before2024-11-07 · 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, interview, clinical record review and facility documentation, the facility staff failed to review and revise the care plan care plan for 1 Resident (#5) in a survey sample of 5 Residents. The findings included: For Resident # 5 the facility staff failed to revise the care plan after the Resident had an actual fall. Resident #5 was admitted to the facility on 10/3 with diagnoses including but not limited to cerebral infarction due to unspecified cerebral artery, altered mental status, hypertension, gastro-esophageal reflux, hyperlipidemia, dementia, mood disturbance, anxiety degenerative disease of the nervous system, Type 2 diabetes, muscle wasting and atrophy cognitive communication deficit anemia and vitamin d deficiency. On the morning of 11/6/24 a review of the progress notes revealed the following note: 11/5/24 10:50 a.m. - Nursing observations, evaluation, and recommendations are Resident was observed on the floor by social worker on left side of her bed in sitting position. Nursing staff was notified. When interview resident she stated she was trying 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.
Show the remaining 36 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-11-07 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview, facility documentation review and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to maintain a safe environment for one dependent resident (Resident #4) in a survey sample of 6 residents. For Resident # 4, the facility staff failed to prevent a fall from the bed during incontinence care on 11/26/2023. Findings included: Resident #4 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnoses of, but not limited to, Epilepsy, Parkinsonism, and Essential Hypertension, The most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) was an admission assessment with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 11/9/2023. The MDS coded Resident # 4 with a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status)score of 4/15 indicating severe cognitive impairment; the resident required assistance with activities of daily living and bathing and always incontinent of bowel and bladder. Review of the closed electronic clinical record was conducted on 11/4/2024 to 11/6/2024. Review of the Progress Notes revealed documentation of a Nursing note…
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 before2024-02-27 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — patternEnsure 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 staff interview, facility documentation review, and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to meet professional standards of quality for three Residents (#3, #2, and #1) in a survey sample of 8 residents. Findings included: During tour of the facility on 2/22/2024, the nurses were asked the time of the next scheduled medication pass. The nurses stated 1:00 p.m., On the third floor, nurses were observed passing medications at 11:26 a.m. One nurse was observed standing at medication cart located at the nurses station. One nurse LPN (Licensed Practical Nurse)-F was observed pouring medications in medication cups and walking to a resident's room. The nurse returned to the nurses station, poured medications and walked to another resident's room. The nurse was observed repeating that with other residents. When asked if the medications she was administering was from the morning medication pass, LPN-F stated Yes. LPN-F stated she was handling something that happened earlier and was late passing the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-02-27 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — patternMake sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, resident interview, staff interview, and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to provide a clean and comfortable environment on two of three floors and in the dining room Findings included: On the second and third floors, the shower rooms were observed to be in need of cleaning, affecting residents on those floors who use the shower rooms. During the initial tour of the facility on 2/22/2024, the dining room wall near the entrance of the kitchen was observed to be very dirty with pronounced brown colored streaks extending from the floor to approximately 4 feet up the wall. Residents were observed sitting at tables in the dining room eating meals. The residents had clear view of the dirty wall. The wall was observed to still be dirty on 2/23/2024 and 2/26/2024 during rounds. Residents were observed participating in activities while in the dining room at various times during the survey. On 2/26/2024, tour of the physical environment revealed other areas of concern. On 2/26/2024 at 11 a.m., an interview was conducted with an alert resident 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 before2024-02-27 · 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 documentation review, the facility staff failed to implement the abuse policy for one resident (Resident #1) in a survey sample of 8 residents. Findings included: For Resident #1, the facility staff failed to implement their abuse policy as evidenced by failure to report an allegation of sexual abuse by a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA)-B. According to the facility's documentation, Resident #1 reported an allegation of sexual abused to a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA-C ) with whom he had a personal friendship. Resident #1 stated he told CNA-C not to say anything but he was upset because CNA-B had performed oral sex on him while he was sleepy after pain medication and being bathed. Review of the facility's investigation documents revealed that on 1/7/2024, Resident #1 confided in CNA-C that he had been sexually violated. When Resident #1 confided in another CNA (CNA-E) on 1/8/2024, CNA-E immediately reported to her supervisor who then reported to the Director of Nursing. It was then that the implementation of the abuse policy began. 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 · Dcited before2024-02-27 · 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 interview, clinical record review, and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to report an allegation of abuse within 2 hours of an allegation involving sexual abuse, for one resident (Resident #1) in a survey sample of 8 residents. The findings included: For Resident #1, a facility staff member, CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant )-C failed to identify and report an allegations of sexual abuse to the Administrator. Review of the facility's investigation documents revealed that on 1/7/2024, Resident #1 confided in CNA-C that he had been sexually violated. When Resident #1 confided in another CNA (CNA-E) on 1/8/2024, CNA-E immediately reported to her supervisor who then reported to the Director of Nursing. CNA-C did not report the allegation to the administrator. Interviews were conducted with the Administrator and the Director of Nursing. They were asked if the Certified Nursing Assistant should be able to identify and report abuse and neglect. The Administrator stated all the staff should be able to identify and report abuse and neglect. When asked if 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 · D2024-02-27 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — isolatedMake sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, resident interview, staff interview, facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to ensure an effectively functioning call bell system on two of three units affecting two residents (Residents #3 and #6) in a survey sample of 8 residents. Findings included: 1. For Resident #2, the call bell system did not work properly and the facility staff implemented the use of a cow bell system for notification of the need for assistance. On 2/23/2024, a cow bell was observed in Resident #2's room. An interview was conducted with Resident #2 who stated the cow bell had been in his room for a long time. Resident #2 stated the cow bell was really noisy and disturbed others. On 2/26/2024 at 10:10 a.m., an interview was conducted with the [NAME] President of Maintenance who stated he could provide the documents regarding maintenance because the Maintenance Director was off. The [NAME] President of Maintenance stated the facility utilized the electronic documentation of service requests in the computer system. Review of the facility's documentation of the tests 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 · Fcited before2021-09-03 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interviews, facility document review and clinical record review the facility staff failed to practice and maintain infection control measures to prevent the spread of infections to include Covid-19 while in an active Covid outbreak on 3 of 3 nursing units. The findings included: 1. For the facility in general, 3 employees failed to maintain infection control measures while working in the Resident rooms. Observations on 8/31/21: 830 AM all rooms on the second floor had signs posted on the doors that instructed to use 'Gown Gloves N95 and face shield' in room also there were signs instructing proper donning and doffing and handwashing. 8:45 AM - CNA C was in room [ROOM NUMBER] with no gloves, no gown, and no face shield, however she was wearing an N95 mask she exited the room without washing her hands but did use sanitizer in hall. 8:47 AM an interview was conducted with CNA C who stated I was only going in for a minute. I should have put on gown and gloves though. 12:40 PM observed CNA…
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 · F2021-09-03 · tag F0882 — widespreadDesignate a qualified infection preventionist to be responsible for the infection prevent and control program in the nursing home.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interviews the facility staff failed to have a designated individual to serve as the Infection Preventionist (IP) who had completed specialized training in infection prevention and control. This has the potential to affect all 106 Residents residing in the facility. The findings included: On 8/31/21, during an entrance conference with the facility Administrator, he identified the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) as the facilities designated Infection Preventionist. On 9/02/21 at 11:11 AM, Surveyor B met with Employee C, the ADON/Infection Preventionist. When surveyor B asked to see evidence of her training for the Infection Preventionist role, Employee C stated, I don't have any real training, I do know I've got to take those modules [referring to the Center for Disease Prevention and Control Infection Preventionist Training modules] but I haven't had any real training. On 9/2/21, during an end of day meeting with the facility Administrator, ADON and Corporate Nurse, they were made aware that Employee C doesn't have any specialized training in Infection Prevention…
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 · E2021-09-03 · tag F0680 — patternEnsure the activities program is directed by a qualified professional.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interviews and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to provide a qualified therapeutic recreation specialist or an Activities professional meeting the regulatory requirement to oversee the facility's Activity Program. The findings included: On 09/02/2021 at approximately 2:15 P.M., an interview with Employee D, the Community Life Director, was conducted. When asked about her training and qualifications as an Activities professional, the Community Life Director stated that she had her Bachelor's degree in Education and her Master's degree in Business. Employee D also stated that the facility trained her to be the Community Life Director. When asked about previous work experience, the Community Life Director stated that in her previous employment, she was a teacher. On 09/02/2021 at approximately 2:50 P.M., an interview with Employee G, Human Resources, was conducted. When asked about the employment status of the Community Life Director, Employee G indicated that the Community Life Director was initially hired in January 2020 as a part time…
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 · E2021-09-03 · tag F0886 — failed to test for COVID-19 as required — patternPerform COVID19 testing on residents and staff.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interview, facility documentation review and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to conduct COVID-19 testing of one Resident (Resident #112) who was symptomatic and failed to conduct routine COVID-19 testing of all unvaccinated staff, to prevent the spread of COVID-19 infections within the facility. The findings included: 1. For Resident #112, the facility staff failed to conduct COVID-19 testing immediately following the Resident presenting with symptoms. Review of the clinical record for Resident #112 revealed a progress note dated 8/4/21 at 6:45 AM, that read, .Stuffy nose with intermittent cough. Large amount of yellow mucus from mouth. Unable to cough out anything from mouth. Afebrile. The clinical record revealed no evidence of COVID-19 testing following the display of COVID symptoms, until 8/7/21, when the facility staff conducted facility wide outbreak testing. On 09/02/21 at 11:11 AM, Surveyor B met with Employee C, the Infection Preventionist. Employee C was asked to provide the line listing of Resident's and Staff who have had symptoms and/or…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2021-09-03 · tag F0573 — isolatedLet each resident or the resident's legal representative access or purchase copies of all the resident's records.
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, facility documentation review, and in the course of a complaint investigation, the facility staff failed for 1 resident (Resident #103) in the survey sample of 46 residents, to grant a written request for access to medical records. The Findings included: The facility staff failed to grant Resident #182's Responsible Party's request for a copy of medical records. Review of the Clinical record was conducted on 9/1/2021 and 9/2/2021. The Minimum Data Set, which was an admission Assessment with an Assessment Reference Date of 3/19/2021 was reviewed. Resident #182 was coded as having severely impaired cognition. Review of the record revealed Resident #182 had a Responsible party listed on the facesheet. Resident # 182 was hospitalized on [DATE] and did not return to the facility. The Responsible Party requested a copy of Resident # 182's medical record admission paperwork on 3/23/2020. On 09/03/2021, a review was conducted of facility documentation, revealing a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2021-09-03 · 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
Based on observation, staff interview and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to uphold one Resident's (Resident #49) personal privacy during care, in a survey sample of 41 Residents. This failure to uphold a Resident's privacy has the potential to violate the Resident's dignity and cause feelings of embarrassment. The findings included: On 9/1/21 at 4:06 PM, Surveyor B knocked on the room door of Resident #49. After hearing no response, Surveyor B opened the door and observed CNA B at the bedside providing care. Resident #49 was exposed and the privacy curtain was not pulled around Resident #49, leaving her exposed to her roommate as well as anyone entering the room. CNA B stated she was changing Resident #49's gown. CNA B was asked if she normally pulls the privacy curtain when providing care, CNA B stated, normally I do on this side [referring to between Resident #49 and her roommate], but there just isn't room. When asked why the privacy curtain would be used during care, CNA B stated, For her privacy. Resident #49 was not interviewable to ask how this…
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 before2021-09-03 · 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, clinical record review and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to implement their abuse policy by failing to conduct a post investigation follow-up report after an allegation of abuse involving two Residents (Resident #27 and Resident #70) in a survey sample of 41 Residents. The findings included: On 9/2/21, during a clinical record review, Resident #27's electronic health record revealed a nursing progress note entry dated 7/24/21 at 19:26, which read, Resident was involved in an incident with another resident. All management, MD/NP [medical doctor/ nurse practitioner], and RP [responsible person/party] have been notified of all recent events, according to facilities policy and procedure guidelines. On 9/2/21, Surveyor B asked the facility staff to provide any FRI's (Facility Reported Incidents) involving Resident #27 for the year 2021. Upon receipt of 2 FRI's, Surveyor B observed that the Resident to Resident altercation between Resident #27 and #70 on 7/24/21, had no post-investigation follow-up report, to state the investigation…
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 before2021-09-03 · 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, clinical record review and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to report to the State Survey Agency the result(s) of an investigation within 5 working days, following an allegation of abuse involving two Residents (Resident #27 and Resident #70) in a survey sample of 41 Residents. The findings included: On 9/2/21, during a clinical record review, Resident #27's electronic health record revealed a nursing progress note entry dated 7/24/21 at 19:26, which read, Resident was involved in an incident with another resident. All management, MD/NP [medical doctor/ nurse practitioner], and RP [responsible person/party] have been notified of all recent events, according to facilities policy and procedure guidelines. On 9/2/21, Surveyor B asked the facility staff to provide any FRI's (Facility Reported Incidents) involving Resident #27 for the year 2021. Upon receipt of 2 FRI's, Surveyor B observed that the Resident to Resident altercation between Resident #27 and #70 on 7/24/21, had no post-investigation follow-up report, to indicate the results…
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 before2021-09-03 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure 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 Based on observation, interview, and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to accurately complete MDS assessments for (3) Residents (#'s 51, 55, 57) in a survey sample of 40 residents. The findings included: 1. For Resident #51, the facility staff did not accurately complete the Quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment dated [DATE] to reflect the status of the Resident. On 8/31/21 at approximately 9 AM an observation was made of Resident #51 lying in bed, the head of bed was elevated to a 45° angle and his tube feeding was infusing. The Resident did not answer to his name being called. The resident opened his eyes however they did not focus on surveyor, and gave no indication that he understood what the surveyor was saying. A review of the MDS revealed that the facility answered question C0100 Should BIMS be assessed? The answer was marked (1) yes For the MDS question C0500 BIMS Score a dash (-) was placed in the box instead of 99 (unable to access). For section G functional status the following…
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 before2021-09-03 · 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 interview, observation, clinical record review and facility documentation the facility staff failed to review and revise care plans for 1 Resident (#55) in a survey sample of 40 Residents. The Findings include: For Resident #55 the facility staff failed to review and revise the care plan to include an actual fall with major injury on 6/4/21. On 9/1/21 during clinical record review it was discovered that Resident #55's care plan read as follows: [Resident name redacted] is at risk for falls/potential for injury r/t confusion unaware of safety needs, psychotropic medication, pacemaker, a fib, Tachycardia and history of pain. Dementia history of falls Under interventions from most recent fall (6/4/21) when she broke her hip it listed; send to ER for evaluation and X-ray to hip as ordered. On 9/1/21 an interview was conducted with LPN B who was asked the purpose of a care plan, she stated It directs care of the resident. She was also asked who has access to the care plan, and she stated all nursing staff have access. LPN B was then asked to review Resident # 55's care plan for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-09-03 · 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 interviews, staff interviews, and clinical record reviews, the facility staff failed to provide care and services according to professional standards of care for 1 resident (Resident #288) in a sample size of 46 residents. The findings included: 1. For Resident #288, the facility staff failed to provide wound treatment on 08/31/2021, 09/01/2021, and 09/02/2021 as ordered by the physician. On 09/01/2021 at 11:55 A.M., Resident #288 was interviewed. When asked if he had any wounds, Resident #288 indicated he had wounds on his right foot. When asked how he got the wounds, Resident #288 stated that his foot got all scratched up and it got worse and worse. Resident #288 moved the bed covers from his right foot to reveal the right foot with a dressing of kerlix and clear tape. The dressing was not dated or initialed. When asked if the dressing had been changed this day, Resident #288 stated it had not been changed today. Resident #288 indicated that the nurses haven't changed 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 · D2021-09-03 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview, clinical record review the facility staff failed to provide timely ADL care to 1 dependent Resident (#15) in a survey sample of 40 Residents. For Resident #15 the facility staff failed to provide incontinent care in a timely manner resulting in Resident #15 sitting in a soiled brief for 2 hours. The findings included: On 8/31/21 at approximately 12:15 PM Resident # 15 and his roommate, Resident # 100 were observed in their room. The surveyor began talking to Resident number 100 about care provided at the facility and he stated Just ask my roommate he rang the bell at 10 o'clock to get changed and its 12:15 and they just changed him. At approximately 12:20pm, an interview was conducted with Resident # 15 who stated, I can't wait to get out of this place, and yes I did ring at 10 o'clock to get changed. The CNA came into the room told me I have to go get something I'll be right back. She left and came back at 12:00 PM. I just now got changed at 12 o'clock. At 1:00 PM an interview was conducted with CNA B who stated that she tries to get to everyone as fast as she…
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 · D2021-09-03 · tag F0687 — failed to care for feet properly — isolatedProvide appropriate foot care.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and clinical record review and in the course of an investigation the facility staff failed to provide appropriate foot care for 1 Resident (# 12) in a survey sample of 40 residents. The findings included: For Resident # 12 the facility staff failed to trim toenails or arrange for podiatry to do so for a Resident who is diabetic. On 8/31/21, an interview was conducted with resident #12 at approximately 10 AM. Resident # 12 was asked about the ADL care that he received from the facility and he stated he gets his showers but nobody ever cuts his toenails. When asked if he had seen the podiatrist he said, One time since I've been here. When asked if the surveyor could look at his feet, Resident #12 took off his shoes and the Surveyor observed that both feet had nails that were approximately 1/4 inch of an inch long. According to the admission MDS, Resident #12 was admitted in April 2018. During clinical record review, it was found that the resident had only one podiatry visit. The podiatrist saw the Resident on 3/16/21. Podiatry consult note dated…
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 before2021-09-03 · 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, interview, and facility documentation the facility staff failed to appropriately label and store medications for 2 Residents (#'s 40, 102) in a sample of 40 Residents and failed to remove expired medication from use for one medication cart and one medication room. The findings included: 1. For Resident # 40 the facility staff failed to date the Resident's eye drops when they were opened. On 9/1/21 at approximately 8:45 AM while inspecting the medication carts and medication rooms with LPN D, it was noted that there was a bottle of Latanoprost 0.005% eye drops belonging to Resident #40 that was not dated when opened. The pharmacy sticker on the bottle stated This medication is good for 45 days after opening. At that time, an interview was conducted with LPN D who stated that the sticker on the bottle was a reminder to nurses that the bottle should be dated when opened since it is only good for 45 days. She stated the importance of dating the eye drop bottle is that so you will not know when they are expired and do not keep using them. On 9/1/21 at approximately…
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 · D2021-09-03 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to maintain an accurate clinical record for one resident (Resident #288) in a sample size of 46 residents. The findings included: For Resident #288, the nursing admission assessment documented a wound to the right heel when, in fact, Resident #288 had multiple wounds on the top and side of the right foot and no wound on the right heel. On 09/01/2021 at 11:55 A.M., Resident #288 was interviewed. When asked if he had any wounds, Resident #288 indicated he had wounds on his right foot. When asked how he got the wounds, Resident #288 stated that his foot got all scratched up and it got worse and worse. Resident #288 moved the bed covers from his right foot to reveal the right foot with a dressing of kerlix and clear tape. On 09/02/2021 at 7:05 P.M., this surveyor observed the wounds on Resident #288's right foot as Registered Nurse A (RN A) performed a wound treatment and dressing change. Resident #288 had 4 open wounds 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 · E2018-10-04 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — patternImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
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, facility staff interview, clinical record review, and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed for 6 residents (131, 71, 122, 104, 81, 65) of the survey sample of 46 residents, to ensure that they were free from unnecessary psychotropic medications. 1. For Resident #131, the facility staff failed to ensure that he was free of unnecessary psychotropic medication (Seroquel). 2. For Resident #71 the facility administered antipsychotic medication without proper diagnosis and without attempting at Gradual Dose Reduction. 3. For Resident #122 the facility failed to perform a gradual dose reduction (GDR) on psychotropic medications in spite of Pharmacy recommendations and hospital warning that it was dangerous to give Ambien and narcotic pain medicine. 4. Resident #104 did not have an appropriate diagnosis for the use of Geodon (antipsychotic) as well as having no documented behaviors for over a year. The pharmacist issued two recommendations for a GDR (12-12-17 and 6-7-18) but 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 · Ecited before2018-10-04 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and staff interview, the facility staff failed to ensure safe storage of medications. 1. Two medications were found to be expired, and open and available For Resident administration to Residents #52, and #133. 2. The facility staff failed to discard 2 bottles of expired medication (magnesium oxide) in 2 of 3 medication rooms (1st floor and 3rd floor medication rooms) 3. The facility staff failed to ensure the narcotic box was permanently affixed in 2 of 3 medication refrigerators (2nd and 1st floor medication rooms) In addition, the narcotic box in the 2nd floor medication refrigerator was not locked. The findings include: 1. Two medications were found to be expired, and open and available For Resident administration to Residents #52, and #133. On 10-3-18, at 10:00 a.m., during the medication pour and pass observation, with LPN (B) (licensed practical nurse (B), two pill form, bulk dose medications were noted to be expired. LPN (B) was asked during the medication pour and pass observation how medications are dated for expiration, and she responded we date them…
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 · D2018-10-04 · tag F0582 — isolatedGive residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on staff interview and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to ensure two residents (Resident #232 and 233) of 46 sampled residents was given a form CMS-10055 before discharge from skilled nursing. The findings include: Resident #232 was discharged from skilled nursing on 09/05/2018. A review of the record showed no form CMS-10055 was provided to the resident. Resident #233 was discharged from skilled nursing on 07/08/2018. A review of the record showed no form CMS-10055 was provided to the resident. On 10/04/2018 at 11:15 am, an interview was conducted with employee D who issues the forms to the residents who are discharging from skilled nursing. Employee D stated that she did not know she was supposed to use form CMS-10055 but instead was using form CMS-R-131 The facility was informed of the findings during a briefing on 10/03/2018.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2018-10-04 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, resident interview, staff interview and clinical record review, the facility staff failed for 1 resident (Resident # 92) of the survey sample of 46 residents, to ensure that resident #92 was free from verbal abuse. For Resident #92, the facility staff failed to ensure that she was free of verbal abuse by facility staff on 2 occasions. The Findings included: Resident #92 was a [AGE] year old who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #92's diagnosis included Obesity, Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus with Diabetic Neuropathy, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Low Back Pain, Major Depressive Disorder, Anxiety Disorder, Chronic Pain Syndrome, and Generalized Muscle Weakness. The Minimum Data Set, which was a Quarterly Assessment with an Assessment Reference Date of 8/24/18, coded Resident #92 as having a Brief Mental Status Score of 15, indicating that she was independent in daily decision making ability. Resident #92 was coded as requiring the physical assistance of 2 persons 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 · D2018-10-04 · tag F0606 — failed to not employ staff found guilty of abuse — isolatedNot hire anyone with a finding of abuse, neglect, exploitation, or theft.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview and facility documentation review the facility staff failed to screen employees for convictions of abuse, neglect, exploitation, misappropriation of property, or mistreatment. The facility staff failed to screen two employees prior to hire (Employee G, Employee B). The Findings included: On 10/3/18 at 11:45 A.M., an observation was completed of the facility kitchen. Employee G, and Employee B were working in the kitchen during lunch preparation and service. On 10/3/18 an interview was conducted with the Human Resources Manager (Employee J). The Human Resources Manager stated that the facility did not have any documentation on Employee G, or Employee B. She stated that they were sent by a food service agency. When asked if the facility had verified if they had been found guilty of abuse, neglect, or exploitation, the Human Services Manager stated that a background check had not been obtained by the facility prior to allowing them to work in the facility. They had worked in the facility for several months prior to the survey. On 10/3/18 a review…
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 · D2018-10-04 · 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 clinical record review, facility record review, and staff interview, the facility staff failed to send a plan of care to the receiving hospital for one Resident (Resident #80) upon discharge to the hospital. For Resident #80, the facility staff failed to send a care plan to the emergency department with the Resident upon discharge. The findings included: Resident #80 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included; Stroke with left side weakness, encephalitis, depression, and dialysis. Resident #80's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS), was a significant change assessment, with an assessment reference date of 8-22-18. The document coded the Resident as severely cognitively impaired. The document also coded Resident #80 as requiring total assistance from one to two staff members to complete all activities of daily living. The Resident was sent out to the hospital on 7-3-18 with seizure activity, according to the nursing progress notes, and Registered pharmacist's medication regimen review.…
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 before2018-10-04 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure 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 Based on staff interview and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to ensure an accurate assessment for 1 of 46 residents sampled (Resident #54). Specifically, the facility staff coded on the BIMS a 99 and also did the staff assessment when in fact the resident scored a 5 on the BIMS and the facility staff assessment should not have been completed. The findings included: Resident #54 was admitted [DATE] with diagnoses: anxiety, depression, diabetes, and stroke. Her most recent assessment was a Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE]. This MDS had a score of 99 for the Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS), located in Section C. This interview generates an assessment of the resident's cognitive ability. Resident #54 provided responses to 3 of the 7 questions in the BIMS interview (repeating three words, correct year, and recall of one prior item spoken by the interviewer). She provided incorrect responses to the remaining 4 questions. These questions are in MDS fields C0200-C0400. Her…
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 · D2018-10-04 · tag F0644 — isolatedCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to ensure an accurate PASARR assessment for 1 of 46 residents sampled (Resident #54). The findings included: Resident #54 was admitted [DATE] with diagnoses: anxiety, depression, diabetes, and stroke. Her most recent assessment was a Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE]. This MDS showed a diagnosis of Anxiety, Depression, and Psychotic disorder in fields I5700, I5800, and I5950 respectively. Her prior assessments dated 5/9/2018, 2/6/2018, 11/8/2017, 8/10/2017, 5/10/2017, and 2/7/2017 did not have Psychotic disorder coded, but did list Anxiety and Depression. Her admission History and Physical, dated 1/30/2017, did not list schizophrenia, psychosis, or dementia as active diagnoses. Her PASARR Level I, done 1/30/2017, showed that the field asking Does the resident have a major mental disorder diagnosable under DSM-IV (e.g. schizophrenia, mood, paranoid, panic, or other serious anxiety disorder; somatoform disorder;…
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 before2018-10-04 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, facility documentation and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to, for one Resident, Resident #104, in a survey sample of 46 residents, to ensure the care plan had targeted behaviors and non pharmacological interventions for the use of an antipsychotic medication. Resident #104's care plan had no targeted behaviors or non pharmacological interventions for the twice daily use of Geodon. The findings included: Resident #104 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included anemia, Alzheimer's dementia and psychosis. The most recent Minimum Data Set assessment was a quarterly assessment with an assessment reference date of 9-5-18. Resident #104 was coded as having short and long term memory impairments and was severely impaired in daily decision making. There were no behaviors coded for the last seven days of the ARD. On 10/2/18 at 1:01 PM, Resident #104 was observed eating in her room. She had a regular diet, eating well. On 10/03/18 at 10:38 AM, Review…
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 before2018-10-04 · 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, and clinical record review the facility staff failed to ensure professional standards of nursing for medication administration were followed for 1 residents (#83) of 46 residents in the survey sample. 1. For Resident #83 the facility staff failed to administer calcium per physician order. The findings included: Resident #83, an [AGE] year old, was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included reflux, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, anemia, and depression. The most recent Minimum Data Set assessment was a quarterly assessment with an assessment reference date of 8/29/18. The resident was coded with a Brief Interview of Mental Status score of 11 indicating moderate cognitive impairment and required extensive assistance with activities of daily living. On 10/3/18 at 9:30 a.m., a medication pour and pass observation was conducted with Licensed Practical Nurse F (LPN F). LPN F was observed to prepare medications for Resident #83. LPN F was observed to administer 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 · D2018-10-04 · 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 staff interview and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to develop a comprehensive, collaborative care plan with the hospice agency for 1 of 46 residents sampled (Resident #81). The findings included: Resident #81 was admitted [DATE] with diagnoses of: adult failure to thrive, schizophrenia, pressure ulcers, contractures, and dysphagia. She was admitted to hospice services on 8/21/2018. Resident #81 had an admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) on 8/14/2018 which did not show hospice services in field O0100k. On 8/22/18, the provider completed a significant change in status (SCSA) MDS, which did record hospice services. This SCSA assessment is required when a resident enrolls or dis-enrolls from hospice services. Per the RAI (Resident Assessment Instrument) Manual, v 1.14 (effective 10/1/2016), page 2-23: A SCSA is required to be performed when a terminally ill resident enrolls in a hospice program (Medicare-certified or State-licensed hospice provider) or changes hospice providers 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 · D2018-10-04 · 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, staff interview, and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to administer oxygen per physician order. For Resident #108, the facility staff failed to administer the correct amount of oxygen per physician order. The Findings included: Resident #108 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #108's diagnoses included Generalized Muscle Weakness, Unspecified Dementia without Behavioral Disturbance, Altered Mental Status, Hypertension, and Chronic obstructive Pulmonary Disease. The Minimum Data Set, which was an admission Assessment with an Assessment Reference Date of 9/20/18 coded Resident #108 as requiring the use of oxygen therapy. On 10/2/18 a tour was conducted of the facility. Resident #108's oxygen was being administered at 3 liters per minute. On 10/3/18 at 1:55 P.M., Resident #108's oxygen was being administered at 3 liters per minute. On 10/2/18 a review was conducted of Resident #108's clinical record, revealing a signed physician's order that read, 10/1/18. Oxygen…
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 · D2018-10-04 · tag F0744 — failed to care for residents with dementia — isolatedProvide the appropriate treatment and services to a resident who displays or is diagnosed with dementia.
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 documentation and clinical record review, the facility failed to, for one Resident, Resident #104 in a survey sample of 46 residents, to ensure the resident received care and services for dementia care. Resident #104 has been taking Geodon 60 mg (milligrams) twice daily with no appropriate diagnosis or behaviors since her admission [DATE]). There are no care plan interventions to address behaviors or for the continued use of an antipsychotic. The findings included: Resident #104 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included anemia, Alzheimer's dementia and psychosis. The most recent Minimum Data Set assessment was a quarterly assessment with an assessment reference date of 9-5-18. Resident #104 was coded as having short and long term memory impairments and was severely impaired in daily decision making. There were no behaviors coded for the last seven days of the ARD. On 10/2/18 at 1:01 PM, Resident #104 was observed eating in her room. She had a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2018-10-04 · tag F0801 — isolatedEmploy sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, including a qualified dietician.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview and facility record review, the facility staff failed to ensure that the Acting Dietary Manager was certified. The facility staff failed to ensure that the Acting Dietary Manager was Certified in Dietary Management. The facility did not have a Dietary Manager. The Findings included: On 10/3/18 at 11:45 A.M., an observation was completed of the facility kitchen. The Acting Dietary Manager (Employee A), was working in the kitchen during lunch preparation and service. She stated that her position was Assistant Dietary Manager and Executive Chef. Her hire date according to her employee file was 8/1/18. She stated since the former Dietary Manager quit, that she supervised the meal preparation, ordered food, and cooked food in the facility. She stated that she was not a Certified Dietary Manager, and that she planned to be trained for the certification the following week. On 10/3/18 a review was conducted of facility documentation, revealing a Employee A's Job Description that read, Assistant Manager & Executive Chef. Qualifications: Certified Dietary…
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 before2018-10-04 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to provide Activities of Daily Living (ADL) care in a manner to prevent the spread of infection. A facility staff member carried a cloth bag from room to room, with no way to disinfect it. The Findings included: On 10-2-18 and 10-3-18 during multiple observations both days throughout the 7:00 a.m., to 3:00 p.m. shift, CNA (A) (certified nursing assistant A) was observed by 2 surveyors to be carrying a pink cotton cloth bag, (which resembled a ladies purse), in and out of Residents rooms. CNA (A) was observed laying it down on residents overbed tables when she entered each room. The bag contained shampoo, soap and other bathing supplies which were being used by CNA (A), and shared for all of the residents receiving ADL care from CNA (A). On 10-4-18 at 9:50 a.m., CNA (A) was interviewed, and stated the bag contained shampoo, soap and other bathing supplies which were being used by CNA (A) for all of the residents ADL care. She further stated I buy it myself, but I won't carry the bag,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“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
$36,283 in federal fines across 4 penalties.
- $14,151 — penalty dated 2026-02-06
- $12,106 — penalty dated 2024-02-27
- $6,774 — penalty dated 2024-01-22
- $3,252 — penalty dated 2023-12-26
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 MARQUIS HEALTH SERVICES — 87 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 | 2 of 5 | 3.0 | -1.0 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 2.6 | -0.6 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 2.3 | -1.3 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.3 | +0.7 vs chain |
The other 86 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.0★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 86; lowest-rated first.
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| SKILLED VENTURE LLC | Organization | DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 12/01/2022 |
| M&T BANK | Organization | 5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST; 5% OR GREATER SECURITY INTEREST | since 12/01/2022 |
| HARMAN, DINA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; ADP OF THE SNF | since 12/01/2022 |
| LAW, JOSEPH | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; ADP OF THE SNF | since 12/01/2022 |
| TEALAKH, BORHAN | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/04/2024 |
| VIROJA, YOGESH | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; ADP OF THE SNF | since 12/01/2022 |
| POSEN, MINDEE | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | since 12/01/2022 |
| MARQUIS LIMITED LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/11/2025 |
| RELIANT PRO REHAB LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/11/2025 |
| BERGMAN, CARL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 12/01/2022 |
| NFR 2020 IRRV TR | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 12/01/2022 |
| QUINTO NEXGEN LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 12/01/2022 |
| RSBRMK HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 12/01/2022 |
| SK NEXGEN TR | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 12/01/2022 |
| SOUTHAMPTON PROPERTY LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 12/01/2022 |
| TRYKO NEXGEN HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 12/01/2022 |
| UAK 2020 IRRV TR | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 12/01/2022 |
| UKR NEXGEN LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 12/01/2022 |
| YK NEXGEN TR | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 12/01/2022 |
| YR NEXGEN TR | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 12/01/2022 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 31 rows in the source record cover these 20 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
14 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.
About 84% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $6.0M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 30% 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 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 495423. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2021-09-03, 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.