Colonial Health & Rehab Center, LLC
1604 Old Donation Pkwy, Virginia Beach, VA 23454 · For profit - Corporation · 90 certified beds · (757) 496-3939 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Nov 2019
- 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
- it has 4 actual-harm citations
- a high number of inspection citations overall (61) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $78,455 in federal fines (most recent 2024-09-18)
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (67%) runs well above the national median (45%)
- its last standard health inspection was over 2 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 | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 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 | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 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 1 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 6.4% | 14.9% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 5.6% | 5.4% | 5.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 1.0% | 0.4% | 0.9% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 1.6% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 14.2% | 18.7% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 4.0% | 3.6% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 8.8% | 15.6% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 19.2% | 20.6% | 18.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 89.3% | 94.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 5.7% | 4.7% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 11.9% | 21.8% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 14.2% | 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 | 30.5% | 73.6% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 29.5% | 22.3% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 13.2% | 11.5% | 12.0% | 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.
62.8% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 143 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 60.7% 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 61 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 0.29 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 44% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 5% of this home’s weekday level — it runs 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 | 62.8%CMS range 55.4–70.6 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.5%CMS range 6.8–12.8 | 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 | 60.7% | 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 | 68.8% | 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 | 62.3% | 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 | 98.9% | 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 | 95.7% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 98.2% | 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 | 2.2% | 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 | 1.1% | 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 | 5.7%CMS range 3.1–10.6 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.71 | 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 90 beds and averages 79.3 residents a day — about 88% occupied, or roughly 11 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 3.52 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.76 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.82 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 2.81 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.80 on weekdays — 26% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.87 to 0.48 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 67% is well above the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 2 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.
61 citations, most serious first. The 14 most serious are shown; the remaining 47 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2024-09-18 · 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 5. The facility failed to clarify diuretic medication prior to administering it for Resident #32. Resident #32 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis that included CHF (congestive heart failure), diabetes and dementia. The most recent MDS (minimum data set) assessment, a quarterly assessment, with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 8/2/24, coded the resident as scoring a 02 out of 15 on the BIMS (brief interview for mental status) score, indicating the resident was severely cognitively impaired. A review of the MDS Section GG-functional abilities and goals coded the resident as being dependent for mobility/transfers, dressing, hygiene toileting and set up for eating. A review of the comprehensive care plan dated 3/14/24 revealed, FOCUS: Resident has impairment a potential for fluid deficit related to diuretic. INTERVENTIONS: Administer medication as directed by physician. A review of the physician orders dated 3/13/24 revealed Furosemide 20 mg po twice a day. Furosemide 40 mg po twice a day 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.
- Actual harm · G2024-09-18 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on resident interview, staff interview, facility document review, and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to implement an effective pain management program for two of 35 residents in the survey sample, Residents #5 and #138. The findings include: 1. For Resident #5 (R5), the facility staff failed to obtain and verify physician orders for pain medications when the resident was re-admitted to the facility at 2:00 p.m. on 5/11/24 with two broken femurs (thigh bones). This resulted in harm: on 5/13/24 at approximately 1:15 a.m., R5 was transferred to the hospital for inadequate pain control. A review of R5's clinical record revealed a nurse's note dated 6/5/24 that documented the resident sustained a fall and was transferred to the hospital. R5 was discharged from the hospital back to the facility on 5/11/24. The hospital Discharge summary dated [DATE] documented a primary discharge diagnosis of bilateral distal femur fractures secondary to osteoporosis and a mechanical fall. The hospital…
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 · G2024-09-18 · tag F0710 — isolatedObtain a doctor's order to admit a resident and ensure the resident is under a doctor's care.
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 provide physician services for one of 35 residents in the survey sample, Resident #5. The findings include: For Resident #5 (R5), the on-call nurse practitioner failed to verify medication orders when the resident was re-admitted on [DATE]. This resulted in harm: on 5/13/24 at approximately 1:15 a.m., R5 was transferred to the hospital for inadequate pain control. Also, the R5's blood sugar was documented as 579 (1), the resident was diagnosed with diabetic ketoacidosis (2), and the resident required an insulin drip (insulin that is intravenously infused). A review of R5's clinical record revealed a nurse's note dated 6/5/24 that documented the resident sustained a fall and was transferred to the hospital. R5 was discharged from the hospital back to the facility on 5/11/24. The hospital Discharge summary dated [DATE] documented a primary discharge diagnosis of bilateral distal femur fractures secondary 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.
- Actual harm · G2021-07-08 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, resident interview, staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined that facility staff failed to obtain a treatment for pre-existing pressure ulcer* that had later declined to an unstageable (1) pressure ulcer for one of 41 residents in the survey sample; Resident #35 AND failed to provide treatment and services to promote the healing of a pressure sore for one of 41 residents; Resident #74. *Pressure Injury (ulcer) - A pressure injury is localized damage to the skin and underlying soft tissue usually over a bony prominence or related to a medical or other device. The injury can present as intact skin or an open ulcer and may be painful. The injury occurs as a result of intense and/or prolonged pressure or pressure in combination with shear. The tolerance of soft tissue for pressure and shear may also be affected by microclimate, nutrition, perfusion, co-morbidities and condition of the soft tissue. https://npuap.org/page/PressureInjuryStages. 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 · Fcited before2024-09-18 · 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
Based on staff interview and facility document review, it was determined the facility staff failed to maintain a complete infection control program. The findings include: The facility staff failed to maintain infection control surveillance for December 2023 and February 2024 and incomplete tracking for March, April and May 2024. The infection control surveillance tracking was reviewed. There was nothing documented for December 2023 and February 2024, it was blank. The tracking logs for March, April and May 2024 had attached the Antibiotic Medications Reports only. There was no documentation of date symptoms started, culture results, or radiology reports. An interview was conducted with ASM (administrative staff member) #2, the director of nursing, on 9/18/24 at 2:18 p.m. The above documents were reviewed with ASM #2. When asked about the December 2023 tracking, ASM #2 stated the book was given to the previous ADON (assistant director of nursing) to take care of. The documentation for March, April and May 2024 were reviewed. When asked if this was accurate documentation 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 · Ecited before2024-09-18 · tag F0622 — patternNot transfer or discharge a resident without an adequate reason; and must provide documentation and convey specific information when a resident is transferred or discharged.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interview, clinical record review and facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to evidence that all hospital transfer documentation requirements were implemented for three of 35 residents in the survey sample; Residents #36, #9 and #11. The findings include: 1. For Resident #36, the facility staff failed to evidence what, if any, documents were sent to the receiving facility upon a hospital transfer and/or ensure that the physician wrote a note regarding a hospital transfer. A review of the clinical record revealed the following: A. 6/20/24 - no evidence of what, if any, documents were sent: A nurse's note dated 6/20/24 documented, Resident assessed by PA (physician's assistant) and NP (nurse practitioner) and new orders given and noted to send to (hospital) for further eval (evaluation) for possible TIA/CVA (stroke) due to symptoms. Resident noted with delayed reaction during conversation Further review revealed no evidence of what, if any, documents were sent to the hospital, including contact information of the practitioner who was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-09-18 · tag F0623 — patternProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interview, clinical record review and facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to evidence that written notification of a hospital transfer was provided to the resident representative and the Ombudsman for three of 35 residents in the survey sample; Residents #36, #9 and #11. The findings include: 1. For Resident #36, the facility staff failed to evidence that a written notice was provided to the resident representative and Ombudsman upon hospital transfers on 6/20/24, 7/6/24 and 7/18/24. A review of the clinical record revealed that the resident was transferred to the hospital for change in condition concerns on 6/20/24, 7/6/24 and 7/18/24. Further review failed to reveal any evidence of a written notice to the resident representative and Ombudsman for the above hospital transfers. On 9/17/24 at 2:18 PM, an interview was conducted with OSM #8 (Other Staff Member) the Director of Social Services and Admissions. He stated that for the above hospital transfers, he ran the wrong report when he was doing my hospital transfers report faxed…
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 before2024-09-18 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — patternDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, resident interview, staff interview, clinical record review and facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to implement the comprehensive care plan for four of 35 residents in the survey sample, Residents #42, #21, #138 and #11. The findings include: 1. For Resident #42 (R42), the facility staff failed to implement the comprehensive care plan to A) get the resident out of bed and B) provide tube feeding as ordered. On the most recent MDS (minimum data set), a quarterly assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 6/13/24, the resident was assessed as being severely impaired for making daily decisions, not rejecting care, being dependent on staff for transfers and having a feeding tube. A) On 9/15/24 at 5:24 p.m., an observation was conducted of R42 in their room. R42 was observed in bed watching television with tube feeding observed hanging beside them on a feeding tube pump. At that time, an interview was conducted with R42 who was able to verbalize some words and use a communication board. R42 stated that they had 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 before2024-09-18 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — patternProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, clinical record review and facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to provide oxygen related care and services for three of 35 residents in the survey sample; Residents #60, #11, and #42. The findings include: 1. For Resident #60, the facility staff failed to ensure an order was in place for the administration of oxygen. On 9/15/24 at 5:01 PM, Resident #60 was observed in bed, wearing a nasal cannula for oxygen and the oxygen concentrator was set at 3 liters per minute. On 9/16/24 at 11:19 AM, Resident #60 was observed in bed, wearing a nasal cannula for oxygen and the oxygen concentrator was set at 3.5 liters per minute. On 9/17/24 at 2:42 PM, Resident #60 was observed in bed, wearing a nasal cannula for oxygen and the oxygen concentrator was set at 3.5 liters per minute. A review of the clinical record failed to reveal any evidence of a physician's order for the use of oxygen. On 9/17/24 at 2:57 PM an interview was conducted with LPN #3 (Licensed Practical Nurse) who was the assigned to Resident #60. When…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-09-18 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — patternProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on resident interview, staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined the facility staff failed to provide pharmacy services for five of 35 residents in the survey sample and on one of two units, Residents #138, #63, #48, #16, #88 and Unit 2. The findings include: 1. For Resident #138, the facility staff failed to provide physician prescribed medications, Morphine Sulfate, in a timely manner. An interview was conducted with R138 on [DATE] at 5:06 p.m. R138 stated he got to the facility on [DATE] at 6:00 p.m. He didn't get any medications for over 12 hours. The physician order dated, [DATE] at 3:59 p.m. documented, Morphine tablet extended release; 15 mg (milligrams); administer 3 tabs (tablets) every 12 hours for malignant neoplasm of prostate. The [DATE] MAR (medication administration record) documented the above order. There were blanks on the MAR for the administration of the Morphine on [DATE], [DATE] and [DATE] at 9:00 p.m. The Controlled Medication Utilization…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-09-18 · 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, clinical record review and facility document review, it was determined the facility staff failed to ensure residents were free of unnecessary medications for one of 35 residents in the survey sample, Resident #39. The findings include: For Resident #39 (R39), the physician ordered furosemide (used to treat swelling) 20mg (milligrams)- one tablet two times a day and to administer an additional tablet if the resident presented with a weight gain greater than two pounds in one day. The facility staff failed to weigh the resident daily to determine if an additional tablet was needed. A review of R39's clinical record revealed a physician's order dated 7/20/24 for furosemide 20 mg- one tablet twice a day for congestive heart failure. The physician ordered special instructions documented to administer an additional one tablet for a weight gain greater than two pounds in one day. Further review of R39's clinical record failed to reveal any weights for 9/1/24 through 9/14/24. A facility document titled, Sept Monthly weights documented multiple residents' names 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 · E2024-09-18 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, resident interview, staff interview, and facility document review, it was determined the facility staff failed to serve food at a palatable temperature for five of 35 residents in the survey sample, Residents #21, #63, #46, #39 and #59. The findings include: On the most recent MDS (minimum data set), a quarterly assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 7/20/24, Resident #21 (R21) scored 13 out of 15 on the BIMS (brief interview for mental status), indicating the resident was cognitively intact for making daily decisions. On 9/15/24 at 5:14 p.m., an interview was conducted with R21. The resident stated the facility food was nasty and cold when it arrived. On the most recent MDS, a quarterly assessment with an ARD of 8/16/24, Resident #63 (R63) scored 10 out of 15 on the BIMS, indicating the resident was moderately impaired for making daily decisions. On 9/15/24 at 6:05 p.m., an interview was conducted with R63. The resident stated the facility food was often cold. On the most recent MDS, a quarterly assessment with an ARD of 7/24/24, Resident #46…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-18 · 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 resident interview, staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined the facility staff failed to promote dignity for one of 35 residents in the survey sample, Resident #137. The findings include: For Resident #137 (R137), the facility staff instructed the resident to pee in her pants, thus not providing dignified care. On 9/15/24 at 4:53 p.m. an interview was conducted with R137. R137 stated that the staff would not get her up from the bed until therapy had screened her. When asked how she was going to the bathroom, the staff told her to pee in her pant. R137 was asked how that made her feel, she stated it made her feel like an idiot and was embarrassed. A second interview was conducted with R137 on 9/16/24 at 8:44 a.m. When asked how her night was, she stated she was told to 'pee' in her diaper through the night as she hadn't been evaluated by therapy. When asked if she was offered the use of a bedpan, R137 stated no. The admission Assessment dated, 9/14/24 at 6:46 p.m. documented in part, Resident is alert, oriented, memory is…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-18 · 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 resident interview, staff interview, clinical record review and facility document review, it was determined that the facility failed to implement their abuse policy for reporting an allegation of abuse within two hours after the allegation was made, for one of 35 residents in the survey sample, Resident #21 (R21). The findings include: For R21, the facility staff failed to implement their abuse policy by not reporting an allegation of abuse reported to staff on 7/1/24 until 7/2/24. The facility policy Virginia Resident Abuse Policy revised 10/03/2022 documented in part, .Facility staff must immediately report all such allegations to the Administrator/Abuse Coordinator. The Administrator/Abuse Coordinator will immediately begin an investigation and notify the applicable local and state agencies in accordance with the procedures in this policy . If the event that caused the allegation involves an allegation of Abuse or serious bodily injury, it should be reported to the DOH (department of health) immediately, but not later than 2 hours after the allegation is made . On 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.
Show the remaining 47 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-18 · 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 resident interview, staff interview, clinical record review and facility document review, it was determined that the facility failed to report an allegation of abuse in a timely manner for one of 35 residents in the survey sample, Resident #21 (R21). The findings include: For R21, the facility staff failed to report an allegation of abuse that was reported to staff on 7/1/24 until 7/2/24. On the most recent MDS (minimum data set), a quarterly assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 7/20/24, R21 scored 13 out of 15 on the BIMS (brief interview for mental status) assessment, indicating the resident was cognitively intact for making daily decisions. On 9/15/24 at 5:14 p.m., an interview was conducted with R21. R21 stated that they had recently filed a police report against another resident at the facility for threatening them. R21 stated that they had been in the hallway near the dining room and another resident [Name of Resident #64] had started arguing with them and threatened to kick her [expletive] and stab them. R21 stated that Resident #64 (R64) had…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-18 · tag F0625 — isolatedNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview, clinical record review and facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to evidence a written bed hold notice was provided to the resident and/or resident representative upon a hospital transfer for two of 35 residents in the survey sample; Residents #36 and #9. The findings include: 1. For Resident #36, the facility staff failed to evidence that a written bed hold notice was provided to the resident and/or representative upon a hospital transfer. A nurse's note dated 6/20/24 documented, Resident assessed by PA (physician's assistant) and NP (nurse practitioner) and new orders given and noted to send to (hospital) for further eval (evaluation) for possible TIA/CVA (stroke) due to symptoms. Resident noted with delayed reaction during conversation The resident was readmitted on [DATE]. Further review failed to reveal any evidence that a written bed hold notice was provided. On 9/17/24 at 2:31 PM, an interview was conducted with LPN #10 (Licensed Practical…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-09-18 · tag F0635 — isolatedProvide doctor's orders for the resident's immediate care at the time the resident was admitted.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined the facility staff failed to ensure admission orders were put in place to provide immediate care for one of 35 residents in the survey sample, Resident #139. The findings include: For Resident #139(R139), the resident was admitted on [DATE] at 5:09 p.m. The admission orders were not entered into the computer until 3/22/24, 20 hours after the resident was admitted . Review of the clinical record, failed to evidence a nursing admission assessment for 3/21/24. The Discharge documents from the hospital documented the following orders: Tylenol 650 mg (milligrams)/20 ml (milliliters) soln (solution): 20.3 ml by po/g-tube (by mouth/gastrostomy tube) every 4 hours as needed for fever - pain. - entered into the medical record on 3/22/24 at 1:45 p.m. Amlodipine 5 mg tablets: instill 1 tab (tablet) into tube once a day. Indications: high blood pressure. Entered into the medical record on 3/22/24 at 1:41 p.m. Finasteride 5 mg…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-18 · 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 observations, staff interview, clinical record review and facility document review, it was determined the facility staff failed to provide an accurate MDS (minimum data set) assessment for two out of 35 residents in the survey sample, Resident #48 and Resident #58. The findings include: 1.The facility staff failed to complete an accurate MDS (minimum data set), a quarterly assessment for Resident #48. Resident #48 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis that included but were not limited to: ICH (intracranial hemorrhage), hemiplegia, hemiparesis and DM (diabetes mellitus). The most recent MDS (minimum data set) assessment, a quarterly assessment, with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 7/20/24, coded the resident as scoring a 07 out of 15 on the BIMS (brief interview for mental status) score, indicating the resident was severely cognitively impaired. A review of the MDS Section GG-functional abilities and goals coded the resident as being dependent for bed mobility, transfer, hygiene…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-09-18 · 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 staff interview, facility document review, and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to follow professional standards of practice for one of 35 residents in the survey sample, Resident #5. The findings include: For Resident #5 (R5), the facility staff failed to obtain a physician's order prior to administering insulin (used to treat diabetes) to the resident on 5/12/24. R5 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE]. A review of R5's clinical record failed to reveal any physician's medication orders when the resident was re-admitted on [DATE]. A review of R5's MAR (medication administration record) for 5/11/24 and 5/12/24 failed to reveal any medication orders. A nurse's note dated 5/12/24 at 10:58 p.m. (recorded as a late entry on 5/13/24), documented, Received care of resident at 22:40 (10:40 p.m.) Resident had been released from the hospital a day before after falling face first on concrete. Resident states she is in a severe pain. This nurse looked at resident's MAR which was inadequately…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-18 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on resident interview, staff interview, facility document review, and clinical record review it was determined the facility staff failed to provide ADL (activities of daily living) care for three of 35 residents in the survey sample, Residents #33, 46, and #42. The findings include: 1. For Resident #33 (R33), the facility staff failed to provide oral care. An interview was conducted with R33 on 9/15/24 at 5:29 p.m. The resident was in bed. R33 stated she has to ask for help in brushing her teeth. She stated she had asked someone to assist her this afternoon but no one has responded. A second interview was conducted with R33 on 9/16/24 at 8:47 a.m. She stated she was never offered to brush her teeth after this writer left on 9/15/24. On the most recent MDS (minimum data set) assessment, an annual assessment, with an assessment reference date of 8/30/24, the resident scored a 14 out of 15 on the BIMS (brief interview for mental status) score, indicating the resident was not cognitively impaired for making…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-09-18 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolatedEnsure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
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 provide care and services for a feeding tube for two of 35 residents in the survey sample, Residents #139 and #42. The findings include: 1. For Resident #139, the facility staff failed to administer tube feedings per the physician orders and as documented, let the resident eat a meal tray upon admission to the facility, the resident was to be NPO (nothing by mouth). Resident #139 (R139), the resident was admitted on [DATE] at 5:09 p.m. The hospital discharge orders documented in part, TF (tube feeding) - Jevity 1.5 KCAL/ML (calories per milliliter) Dose: 300 ml. Frequency: 4 times daily. Discharge Procedure Orders: NPO TF only (nothing by mouth tube feeding only). Entered into the medical record on 3/22/24 at 2:41 p.m. The MAR (medication administration record) for March 2024, documented the above order. The resident did not receive any tube feedings on 3/21/24 at 8:00 p.m., 3/22/24 at 8:00 a.m. and 12:00…
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 · D2024-09-18 · tag F0694 — isolatedProvide for the safe, appropriate administration of IV fluids for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined the facility staff failed to provide care and services for a midline for one of 35 residents, Residents #88. The findings include: Resident #88 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis that included but were not limited to: respiratory failure, hypertension, diverticulitis and coronary artery disease. The most recent MDS (minimum data set) assessment, a Medicare 5-day assessment, with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 10/30/23, coded the resident as scoring a 15 out of 15 on the BIMS (brief interview for mental status) score, indicating the resident was not cognitively impaired. A review of the MDS Section GG-functional abilities and goals coded the resident as max assist for bed mobility, transfer, hygiene and set up for eating. Section O-Special Procedures: coded the resident for antibiotic, midline and isolation. A review of the comprehensive care plan dated 10/27/23 revealed, FOCUS: The resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-09-18 · tag F0700 — isolatedTry different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined the facility staff failed to complete an accurate bed rail assessment for two of 35 residents in the survey sample, Residents #137 and #138. The findings include: 1. For Resident #137(R137), the facility staff failed to accurately document the side rails on the assessment tool. R137 was observed on 9/15/24 at 4:53 p.m. in bed, with grab bars on both sides of the bed. The Enabler/Physical Restraint/Side Rail Review dated, 9/14/24 at 7:36 p.m. documented in part, Does resident currently use a device that could be considered a restraint (side rail, seat belt, lap buddy, trunk restraint, etc.)? A mark was made next to, no. An interview was conducted with LPN (licensed practical nurse) #1, on 9/18/24 at 9:42 a.m. When asked why a side rail assessment is completed, LPN #1 stated that they could be considered a restraint, so a side rail assessment is done to determine if they need them or want them for mobility. LPN #1 was asked if a grab bar or halo bar are considered side rails,…
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 · D2024-09-18 · tag F0732 — isolatedPost nurse staffing information every day.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interview, clinical record review and facility document review, it was determined the facility staff failed to post daily staffing for one of four days reviewed. The findings include: During the Sufficient and Competent Staffing facility task review started on 9/15/24 and ending on 9/18/24, a review of the daily staffing evidenced the following: On 9/15/24 at 3:00 PM entered the facility for the survey. On the receptionist area in the main lobby the staff posting with a date of 9/13/24 on form. The daily staffing was posted correctly on 9/15/24 by 6:00 PM. On 9/18/24 at 8:50 AM, an interview was conducted with ASM (administrative staff member) #2, the director of nursing. When asked to describe the staff posting process, ASM #2 stated, we just hired a staffing coordinator last week, it will be her responsibility. When asked the process for the weekends, ASM #2 stated, it is the manager on call's responsibility to post the staffing. The manager on call came in both days this weekend, but to deal with emergency situations, so the posted staffing was not changed. On…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-09-18 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on clinical record review, staff interview and facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to act upon pharmacy recommendations in a timely manner for two of 35 residents in the survey sample, Residents #21 and #63. The findings include: 1. For Resident #21 (R21), the facility staff failed to act upon the pharmacy recommendations dated 5/6/24 that the physician approved and ordered lab studies to be completed on the next lab day. Review of the pharmacy consultation report for R21 dated 5/6/24 documented a recommendation to monitor labs (TSH- thyroid stimulating hormone) due to the use of the medication amiodarone on the next convenient lab day and every six months thereafter. The consultation report documented the physician review completed on 5/14/24 with the recommendations accepted and physician's order to check BMP, CBC, TSH (basic metabolic panel, complete blood count, TSH) next lab day. Review of the clinical record failed to evidence the laboratory tests completed or results of the BMP, CBC, or TSH. On 9/18/24 at approximately 10:00 a.m.,…
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 · D2024-09-18 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — isolatedEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, resident interview, staff interview and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to prepare food in a form to meet the resident's needs for one of 35 residents, Resident #46. The findings include: Resident #46 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis that included but were not limited to: dementia, hypertension, CKD (chronic kidney disease). The most recent MDS (minimum data set) assessment, a quarterly Medicare assessment, with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 7/24/24, coded the resident as scoring a 09 out of 15 on the BIMS (brief interview for mental status) score, indicating the resident was moderately cognitively impaired. A review of the MDS Section G-functional status coded the resident as requiring supervision for eating. MDS Section L-Dental codes the resident as missing/broken or loose teeth-yes. A review of the comprehensive care plan dated 3/14/24, which revealed, FOCUS: The resident has oral/dental health needs due 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 · D2024-09-18 · tag F0836 — isolatedEnsure the facility is licensed under applicable State and local law and operates and provides services in compliance with all applicable Federal, State, and local laws, regulations, and codes, and with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview and facility document review, it was determined the facility staff failed to be in compliance with state laws and regulations in regard to maintaining emergency medical equipment on one of two units. The findings include: Observation was made of the Emergency Carts on both units on 9/16/24 at 3:18 p.m. Both carts had a locking device in place, the carts could not be opened without breaking the lock. The Emergency Cart Daily Checklist was reviewed on both carts. The Unit 2 March 2024 Emergency Cart Daily Checklist was reviewed. The cart was signed off as being checked on 3/1/24. From 3/2/24 through 3/31/24, the form was checked off by the same person with their signature on 3/2/24 and a line drawn down for the entire month, ending on 3/31/24. The nurse, the unit manager, that signed the Checklist was no longer employed at the facility and unavailable for interview. An interview was conducted with ASM (administrative staff member) #2, the director of nursing, on 9/17/24 at 9:58 a.m. The above checklist was reviewed with ASM #2. When asked why 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 · D2024-09-18 · tag F0840 — isolatedEmploy or obtain outside professional resources to provide services in the nursing home when the facility does not employ a qualified professional to furnish a required service.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interview, facility policy review and clinical record review, it was determined the facility staff failed to have a contract with a dialysis center where one of 35 residents in the survey sample was getting treatment from, Resident #33. The findings include: Resident #33 attended the dialysis center three times a week. There was no contract between the dialysis center and the facility. The physician orders dated, 8/15/24, documented, Resident to have dialysis on days: M-W-F (Mondays - Wednesdays - Fridays) Dialysis Center name: (name of dialysis center with address), Chair time: 2 p.m. Catheter Site: RUC (right upper chest), Dialysis Transport: (name of transport company with phone number) Bag meal/snack to go with resident to Dialysis. Once a day on Mon, Wed, Fri. A request was made for the contract with the dialysis center documented in the resident's clinical record, on 9/17/24 at 5:13 p.m. and then again on 9/18/24 at 3:00 p.m. No contract was provided prior to exit. The facility policy, Contract Administration and Management Policy, documented in part, A. A…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-18 · 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
Based on staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined the facility staff failed to maintain an accurate clinical record for one of 35 residents in the survey sample, Resident #18. The findings include: For Resident #18 (R18), the facility staff failed to accurate document the administration of a medication. The physician order dated, 3/19/24, documented, Micafungin recon (reconcentrated) soln (solution) (used to treat fungal infections) (1); Amount to Administer: 2 vials of 100 mg (milligram) intravenous. The March 2024 MAR (medication administration record) documented the above order. For the 9:00 a.m. dose on 3/21/24, the initials documented were those of ASM (administrative staff member) #2, the director of nursing. An interview was conducted with ASM #2 on 9/17/24 8:56 a.m. The above MAR was reviewed with ASM #2. When asked if she administered the medication above on 3/21/24, ASM #2 stated she did not. ASM #2 stated she had started to pass medications on the hallway as there was not a nurse to do so. She had logged into the computer and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-09-18 · tag F0849 — isolatedArrange for the provision of hospice services or assist the resident in transferring to a facility that will arrange for the provision of hospice services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview, clinical record review, and review of facility documents, the facility's staff failed to provide a Hospice Care Plan for 1 of 25 residents (Resident #106), in the survey sample. The findings included: Resident #106 was originally admitted to the facility 02/06/23 and readmitted [DATE] after an acute care hospital stay. The current diagnoses included; Hemiplegia, Type 1 diabetes mellitus with diabetic neuropathy and Cerebral Vascular disease. The significant change, Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 10/18/24 coded the resident as completing the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) and scoring 7 out of a possible 15. This indicated Resident #106 cognitive abilities for daily decision making were severely impaired. In Section O Special Treatments and Programs. K1= Coded resident as receiving Hospice Care. The Physician's Order Summary (POS) for October 2024 read: Hospice Evaluation and Treat, 10/03/24. The person-centered care plan 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 · F2021-07-08 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview and facility document review the facility staff failed to store food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. The findings included: The food service staff failed to ensure foods stored in the freezer were labeled and dated when open. On 10/19/21 at 2:45 p.m., during the inspection of the kitchen with the Dietary Manager and Regional Dietitian, the following were observed: Inside the walk-in-freezer was a bag of French Toast, 1 bag of blueberries, 1 bag of strawberries, 1 bag of vegetable blend, 1 bag of broccoli and 1 bag green of peas were open; not labeled and dated. An interview was conducted with the Dietary Manager and the Regional Director on 10/19/21 at approximatley 3:15 p.m. The Dietary Manager stated, Most of our staff are new hires and we have a lot of coaching issues. He said the open bags of frozen food located inside the walk-in-freezer should have been labeled and dated once open. On the same day at approximately 1019/21 at approximately 3:35 p.m., the Dietary Manager provided an in-service document…
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 · E2021-07-08 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — patternReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, resident and staff interviews and clinical record review the facility staff failed to provide the accommodation needed for 1 of 41 residents (Resident #69) in the survey sample. The findings included: The facility staff to ensure Resident #24's call bell remained within reach. Resident #24 was admitted to the nursing facility on 05/11/21. Diagnosis for Resident #24 included but not limited Cerebral Infarction with hemiplegia (paralysis on one side of the body). The current Minimum Data Set (MDS), a quarterly assessment with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 04/24/19 coded Resident #69 with a 13 out of a possible score of 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) indicating no cognitive impairment. In addition, the MDS coded Resident #69 total dependence of two with bathing, extensive assistance of two with bed mobility, dressing, toilet use and personal hygiene with Activities of Daily Living care. Resident #69's comprehensive care plan documented Resident #69 ask risk for falls, requires assist with transfers and have above left knee amputation.…
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 · E2021-07-08 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — patternHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interviews, clinical record review and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to ensure 1 of 41 residents (Resident #63) had an accurate medical record for an advanced directive and failed to ensure 4 out of 41 residents (Resident #27, Resident #22, Resident #9 and Resident #32) in the survey sample were given the opportunity to formulate an advance directive. The findings included: 1. The facility staff failed to ensure Resident #63 had an accurate medical record for an advanced directive. Resident #63 was originally admitted to the nursing facility on 03/11/21. Diagnosis for Resident #63 included but not limited to Acute Upper Respiratory Infection. Resident #63's Minimum Data Set (MDS-an assessment protocol) a significant change assessment with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 06/15/21 coded Resident #63 a 15 out of a possible score of 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS), indicating no impaired cognitive skills for daily decision-making. Resident #63's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2021-07-08 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — patternProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY 4. The facility staff failed to provide personal hygiene for Resident #25 who was dependent on the staff to wash her hair. Resident #25 was admitted to the nursing facility on 3/23/17 with diagnoses that included type II diabetes mellitus, stroke with right sided hemiplegia and hemiparesis and expressive aphasia, high blood pressure and non-Alzheimer's dementia. The resident's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment was a quarterly and coded Resident #25 with clear speech, able to understand the staff and was understood by them. She was coded on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) with a score of 15 out of a possible score of 15, which indicated she was cognitively intact with the skills needed for daily decision-making. She was coded as having no problems with behavior and mood. The resident required extensive assistance of one staff for personal hygiene. She was impaired on one side, upper and lower, in range of motion. The wheelchair was her primary mode of transportation. The resident was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-07-08 · 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, clinical record review, staff and resident interviews, the facility staff failed to ensure dignity was maintained for 1 of 41 residents (Resident #25) in the survey sample to wear personal clothing, wash and cut hair. The findings included: Resident #25 was admitted to the nursing facility on 3/23/17 with diagnoses that included type II diabetes mellitus, stroke with right sided hemiplegia and hemiparesis and expressive aphasia, depression, high blood pressure and non-Alzheimer's dementia. The resident's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment was a quarterly and coded Resident #25 with clear speech, able to understand the staff and was understood by them. She was coded on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) with a score of 15 out of a possible score of 15, which indicated she was cognitively intact with the skills needed for daily decision-making. She was coded as having no problems with behavior and mood. The resident required extensive assistance of one staff for personal hygiene. She was impaired on one side, upper and lower, in range 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 · D2021-07-08 · tag F0551 — isolatedGive the resident's representative the ability to exercise the resident's rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, clinical record review, staff and resident interviews, the facility staff failed to honor choices for 1 of 41 residents (Resident #25) in the survey sample and assist to change out seasonal clothing from winter to spring and summer. The findings included: Resident #25 was admitted to the nursing facility on 3/23/17 with diagnoses that included type II diabetes mellitus, stroke with right sided hemiplegia and hemiparesis and expressive aphasia, high blood pressure and non-Alzheimer's dementia. The resident's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment was a quarterly and coded Resident #25 with clear speech, able to understand the staff and was understood by them. She was coded on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) with a score of 15 out of a possible score of 15, which indicated she was cognitively intact with the skills needed for daily decision-making. She was coded as having no problems with behavior and mood. The resident required extensive assistance of one staff for bed…
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 before2021-07-08 · tag F0622 — isolatedNot transfer or discharge a resident without an adequate reason; and must provide documentation and convey specific information when a resident is transferred or discharged.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interviews, clinical record review and facility documentation review the facility staff failed to send a copy of the Resident's Care Plan to include their goals after being transferred and admitted to the hospital for one resident (Resident #27) in a survey sample of 41 residents. The findings included: Resident #27 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted to the facility on [DATE]. The current diagnoses included; Essential Hypertension and Arthritis Due To Other Bacteria, Right Knee. The quarterly, Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 05/11/21 coded the resident as completing the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) and scoring 15 out of a possible 15. This indicated Resident #27 cognitive abilities for daily decision making were intact. A review of the clinical record on 7/07/21 revealed there were no advance directives in the clinical record on the above residents. A nursing note dated 3/30/2021(6:44 PM) Reads: Resident sent to ER 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 before2021-07-08 · 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 resident interview, staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to provide evidence that one out of 41 residents was invited to attend a care plan meeting, Resident #35. The findings included: Resident #35 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included but were not limited to chronic heart failure, spinal stenosis, and chronic embolism and thrombosis of unspecified deep veins of lower extremity (bilateral). Resident #35's most recent MDS (Minimum Data Set Assessment) was a quarterly assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 5/20/21. Resident #35 was coded as being intact in cognitive function scoring 15 out of possible 15 on the BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status exam). On 7/6/21 at 3:32 p.m., an interview was conducted with Resident #35. He could not recall receiving a recent invitation for a care plan meeting. Resident #35 stated that it had been awhile. Review of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2021-07-08 · tag F0676 — failed to keep up residents' daily-living abilities — isolatedEnsure residents do not lose the ability to perform activities of daily living unless there is a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, a complaint investigation, resident and staff interview and review of facility documentation, the facility staff failed to ensure 2 of 41 residents (Resident #25 and #49) were able to continue to maintain their ability to independently perform mouth care. The findings included: 1. The facility staff failed to provide Resident #25 her electric toothbrush that she independently uses to maintain good oral hygiene. Resident #25 was admitted to the nursing facility on 3/23/17 with diagnoses that included type II diabetes mellitus, stroke with right sided hemiplegia and hemiparesis and expressive aphasia, high blood pressure and non-Alzheimer's dementia. The resident's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment was a quarterly and coded Resident #25 with clear speech, able to understand the staff and was understood by them. She was coded on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) with a score of 15 out of a possible score of 15, which indicated she was cognitively intact with the skills needed for daily decision-making. She was coded as having no problems…
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 before2021-07-08 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on resident interview, staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to assess and monitor two additional skin areas that were observed by the hospice aide during incontinence care on 7/7/21 to Resident #35's bilateral feet. The findings included: Resident #35 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included but were not limited to chronic heart failure, spinal stenosis, and chronic embolism and thrombosis of unspecified deep veins of lower extremity (bilateral). Resident #35's most recent MDS (Minimum Data Set Assessment) was a quarterly assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 5/20/21. Resident #35 was coded as being intact in cognitive function scoring 15 out of possible 15 on the BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status exam). On 7/6/21 at 3:32 p.m., an interview was conducted with Resident #35. Resident #35 had mentioned to this writer that facility staff do not provide him…
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 · D2021-07-08 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, clinical record reviews, staff and resident interviews, the facility staff failed to ensure 2 of 41 residents (Resident #49 and #37) were free of accident hazards. The sit-to-stand mechanical lift was not used in accordance to assessed need to prevent possible accidents for Resident #49, and that fall preventative measures, to include fall mats, were consistently in place to protect from potential fall injuries for Resident #37. The findings include: 1. Resident #49 was admitted to the nursing facility on 8/1/19 with diagnoses that included bipolar disorder, type 2 diabetes mellitus, depression, age related osteoporosis, restless leg syndrome and incomplete paraplegia. The most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) was a quarterly dated 4/6/21 that coded Resident #49 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) with an 11 out of a possible score of 15 that indicated the resident was moderately impaired in the skills for daily decision-making. The resident was assessed to require extensive…
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 before2021-07-08 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, resident and staff interviews, clinical record review, the facility staff failed to follow the physician order for the oxygen flow rate for 1 of 41 residents (Resident # 63) in the survey sample. The findings included: Resident #63 was originally admitted to the nursing facility on 03/11/21. Diagnosis for Resident #63 included but not limited to Acute Upper Respiratory Infection. Resident #63's Minimum Data Set (MDS-an assessment protocol) a significant change assessment with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 06/15/21 coded Resident #63 a 15 out of a possible score of 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS), indicating no impaired cognitive skills for daily decision-making. In addition, under respiratory treatments was coded for the use of oxygen therapy. Resident #63's person centered care plan dated 06/10/21 had a focus which read; Resident #63 is on oxygen therapy. The goal read; will be free from signs and symptoms of hypoxia. One of the intervention included; administer oxygen as ordered. Review of Resident #63's Order Summary Report 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 · D2021-07-08 · tag F0791 — failed to provide routine dental services — isolatedProvide or obtain dental services for each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, resident interview and clinical record review it was determined that facility staff failed to obtain dental services for one of 41 residents, Resident #30. The findings included: Resident #30 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included but were not limited to heart failure, peripheral vascular disease, neurogenic bladder, dementia without behavioral disturbance and quadriplegia. Resident #30's most recent MDS (minimum data set) assessment was a quarterly assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 1/18/21. Resident #30 was coded as being moderately impaired in cognitive function, scoring 08 out of possible 15 on the BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) exam. On 7/6/21 at 2:58 p.m., an interview was conducted with Resident #30. Resident #30 was observed to have some natural teeth; with other missing. Resident #30 stated that his bottom front left tooth was painful, that it felt like his tooth was going into his gums. Resident #30 stated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-07-08 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview, clinical record review and in the course of a complaint investigation, it was determined that facility staff failed to maintain a complete record for one of 41 residents in the survey sample; Resident #73. The findings included: Resident #73 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included but were not limited to heart failure, Alzheimer's disease, high blood pressure and age related osteoporosis. Resident #73's most recent comprehensive MDS (Minimum data set) assessment was a quarterly assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 9/5/20. Resident #73 was coded as being severely impaired in cognitive function scoring 06 out of 15 on the BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) exam. Resident #73 was coded as requiring total dependence on one staff member with most ADLS (activities of daily living); and supervision only with meals. Review of Resident #73 clinical record revealed she was sent to the hospital on [DATE] at 8:30 a.m. for poor nutrition and 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 · Ecited before2019-11-14 · tag F0622 — patternNot transfer or discharge a resident without an adequate reason; and must provide documentation and convey specific information when a resident is transferred or discharged.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interviews, clinical record review and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to send a copy of the comprehensive care plan to include the residents goals after being transferred to the hospital for 6 of 38 residents in the survey sample (Residents #55, #70, #67, #4, #45, & #12). The findings included: 1. Resident #55 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. The current diagnoses included: Hypercalcemia and Alzheimer's disease. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) an admissions assessment with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 10/17/19, coded the resident with a 6 of a total possible score of 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS), indicating Cognitive skills for decision making shows resident as being severely impaired for daily decision making. On 11/04/19, according to the facility's documentation, Resident #55 departed the facility with transport to the local hospital. On 11/14/19 at approximately, 12:16 PM an interview was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2019-11-14 · tag F0625 — patternNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview, clinical record review, and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to provide 4 of 38 residents in the survey sample, and/or the resident representative, a written bed hold notice when discharged to the hospital (Residents #4, #45, #12, #55). The findings included: The facility policy titled-Life Care-Bed Hold included: Policy Statement: It is the facility policy to inform the resident or resident representative of the durations of the bed-hold policy, if any, during which the resident is permitted to return and resume residence when admitted to an acute care facility or goes on therapeutic leave. .Resident or Resident Representative will be provided a 'Notice of Bed Hold Policy' letter at time of transfer; if not immediately possible, notification will be at first available opportunity. .Notice of bed hold policy will be provided with transfer documents. 1. Resident #4 was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #4's most recent discharge to 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 before2019-11-14 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — patternDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY 2. Facility staff failed to develop an ADL (activities of daily living) functional status care plan for Resident #45. Resident #45 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included, but were not limited to, unspecified dementia without behavioral disturbance, and cervical spinal cord injury. Resident #45's most recent MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment was an annual assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 9/30/19. Resident #45 was coded as being moderately impaired in cognitive function scoring 12 out of possible 15 on the BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) exam. Resident #45 was coded as being totally dependent on one staff member with all ADLs (activities of daily living), except with meals. In Section V (Care Area Assessment ) (CAA) Summary, care area ADL Functional/Rehabilitation Potential was triggered on the assessment. A 1 was coded under Section B. Care Planning Decision indicating this care area would be care planned. Review of Resident #45's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2019-11-14 · 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 observations and staff interview the facility staff failed to provide a sanitary environment in the kitchen which could potentially affect most of the 35 current residents in the survey sample. The findings included: On 11/13/2019 at 11:30 a.m., while dietary staff were observed preparing lunch trays, under the metal sink which is located next to the steam table and tray line cob webs and dust was observed on the pipes. On 11/13/2019 at 1:05 p.m., the Surveyor observed cob webs and dust on the pipes under the metal sink in the kitchen. The Surveyor asked the Dietary Manager, What do you see? The Dietary Manager stated, I will get someone to clean the pipes. The Dietary Manager was asked if cob webs should be on the pipes under the sink? The Dietary Manager stated, No, I will get someone to clean the pipes now. The Dietary Manager stated that cleaning the pipes under the sink and counter was not on the cleaning schedule and would have to add it to the schedule. The Administrator and Director of Nursing was informed of the finding at the pre-exit meeting on 11/14/2019 at 4:25…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-11-14 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interviews and facility documentation, the facility staff failed to maintain a clean, sanitary and homelike environment for 2 of 38 residents (Resident #6 and #27) in the survey sample. The findings included: 1. For Resident #6, the wheel chair was observed with worn, torn and cracked armrest pads. Resident #6 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses for Resident #6 included but not limited to, Dementia with behavioral disturbances. The current Minimum Data Set (MDS), quarterly assessment with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 08/01/19 coded the resident with a 00 out of a possible score of 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) indicating severe cognitive impairment. In addition, the MDS coded Resident #6 requiring total dependence of one hygiene and bathing, extensive assistance of two with bed mobility and transfer, extensive assistance of one with dressing and toilet use. The MDS was coded under section G 0600 (mobility devices) was coded for wheel chair…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-11-14 · 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 staff interview, clinical record review and facility document review, it was determined that facility staff failed to ensure one resident (Resident #14), was free from a sexual encounter initiated by another resident (Resident #44) that occurred on two occasions on 8/30/19. The findings included: Resident #14 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included but were not limited to dementia with behavioral disturbance and muscle weakness. Resident #14's most recent MDS assessment was a quarterly assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 8/20/19. Resident #14 was coded as being severely impaired in cognitive function scoring 01 out of possible 15 on the BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) exam. Resident #14 was coded in Section B as sometimes being understood by staff and sometimes understanding staff. Resident #14 was coded as requiring extensive assistance with one staff member with bed mobility, and dressing; and total dependence on staff with personal hygiene.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2019-11-14 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview, facility document review, and clinical record review, it was determined that facility staff failed to implement abuse policies for 2 of 38 residents in the survey sample to ensure Resident #14 was free from a second sexual encounter by Resident #44 that occurred on 8/30/19; and failed to report an allegation of abuse to the facility administrator and to the appropriate state agencies in a timely manner. The findings included: Resident #14 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included but were not limited to dementia with behavioral disturbance and muscle weakness. Resident #14's most recent MDS assessment was a quarterly assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 8/20/19. Resident #14 was coded as being severely impaired in cognitive function scoring 01 out of possible 15 on the BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) exam. Resident #14 was coded in Section B as sometimes being understood by staff and sometimes understanding staff. Resident #14 was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2019-11-14 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined that facility staff failed to report an allegation of abuse that occurred between two residents of 38 sampled residents (Resident #44 and Resident #14) to the facility Administrator and to the appropriate State Agencies in a timely manner. The findings included: Resident #44 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included but were not limited to Schizophrenia, major depressive disorder, anxiety disorder and dementia with Lewy Bodies (1). Resident #44's most recent MDS (minimum data set) assessment was a quarterly assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 9/30/19. Resident #44 was coded as being intact in cognitive function scoring 15 out of 15 on the BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) exam. Resident #44 was coded as requiring limited assistance with one staff member with transfers, locomotion, dressing, and personal hygiene; and independent with bed mobility and meals. Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2019-11-14 · 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 clinical record review, staff interview and facility documentation, the facility staff failed to ensure that 1 of 38 residents (Resident #30) in the survey sample received a complete and accurate Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment. Resident #30's quarterly MDS assessment with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 09/09/19 was coded incorrectly under Section G (Functional Limitations of Range of Motion). The findings included: Resident #30 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses for Resident #30 included but not limited to Cerebrovascular Accident (CVA-stroke) with left hemiparesis (weakness on one side of the body). The current Minimum Data Set (MDS), a quarterly assessment with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 09/09/19 coded the Resident #30 with a 15 out of a possible score of 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) indicating no cognitive impairment. In addition, the MDS coded Resident #30 requiring total extensive assistance of one with transfer, dressing,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2019-11-14 · 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 and clinical record review the facility staff failed to revise the comprehensive care plan for 2 of 38 residents in the survey sample, Residents #40 and #14. The findings included: 1. The facility staff failed to revise Resident #40's care plan to include a DNR (do not resuscitate) order. Resident #40 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included but were not limited to, Chronic Kidney Disease, Stage 3 and Acute Diastolic (Congestive) Heart Failure. Resident #40's Minimum Data Set (MDS-an assessment protocol) with an Assessment Reference Date of 09/24/2019 coded Resident #40 with a BIMS (Brief Interview of Mental Status) score of 08 indicating moderate cognitive impairment. In addition, the Minimum Data Set coded Resident #40 as requiring total dependence of 1 with transfer, dressing, toilet use, personal hygiene and bathing and total dependence of 2 with bed mobility. On 11/13/2019 Resident #40's Comprehensive Care Plan was reviewed and revealed 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 before2019-11-14 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, resident interview, staff interview, clinical record review and facility document review, it was determined that facility staff failed to provide fingernail care for a dependent resident for one of 38 residents in the survey sample, Resident #45. The findings included: Resident #45 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included but were not limited to unspecified dementia without behavioral disturbance, cervical spinal cord injury, and polyneuropathy (1). Resident #45's most recent MDS (minimum data set) assessment was an annual assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 9/30/19. Resident #45 was coded as being moderately impaired in cognitive function scoring 12 out of possible 15 on the BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) exam. Resident #45 was coded as being totally dependent on one staff member with all ADLs (activities of daily living), except with meals. On 11/13/19 at approximately 10:36 a.m., an interview was conducted…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-11-14 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, resident interview, staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined that facility staff failed to provide podiatry services for one of 38 residents in the survey sample, Resident #45. The findings included: Resident #45 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included but were not limited to unspecified dementia without behavioral disturbance, cervical spinal cord injury, and polyneuropathy (1). Resident #45's most recent MDS (minimum data set) assessment was an annual assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 9/30/19. Resident #45 was coded as being moderately impaired in cognitive function scoring 12 out of possible 15 on the BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) exam. Resident #45 was coded as being totally dependent on one staff member with all ADLs (activities of daily living), except with meals. On 11/13/19 at approximately 10:36 a.m., an interview was conducted with Resident #45.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-11-14 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined that facility staff failed to follow physician's orders and plan of care for the application of a hand splint for one of 38 residents in the survey sample, Resident #44. The findings included: Resident #44 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included but were not limited to post stroke, muscle weakness, Schizophrenia, major depressive disorder, and dementia with Lewy Bodies. Resident #44's most recent MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment was a quarterly assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 9/30/19. Resident #44 was coded as being intact in cognitive function scoring 15 out of 15 on the BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) exam. Resident #44 was coded as requiring limited assistance with one staff member with transfers, locomotion, dressing, and personal hygiene; and independent with bed mobility and meals. Resident #44 was coded is Section G0400. (Functional status) as having…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-11-14 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement 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 staff interview, clinical record review and facility document review, it was determined that facility staff failed to ensure one of 38 sampled residents, Resident #47, was free from unnecessary psychotropic drugs. The findings included: Resident #47 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included but were not limited to Dementia without behavioral disturbance, Alzheimer's disease with late onset, mental disorder and anxiety disorder. Resident #47's most recent MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment was a quarterly assessment was an ARD (assessment reference date) of 10/8/19. Resident #47 was coded as being severely impaired in cognitive function scoring 09 out of possible 15 on the BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) exam. Resident #47 was coded in Section D (Mood) as having a mood score of 00. Resident #47 was coded in Section E0200 (Behaviors) as having one episode of verbal behaviors. Resident #47 was coded in Section I (Active Diagnoses) as having Dementia. Resident #47 was 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 · Dcited before2019-11-14 · 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 observations, staff interview, facility document review, and clinical record review, it was determined that facility staff inaccurately documented that one of 38 residents (Resident #44), had a right hand roll/splint in use. The findings included: Resident #44 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included but were not limited to post stroke, muscle weakness, Schizophrenia, major depressive disorder, and dementia with Lewy Bodies. Resident #44's most recent MDS (minimum data set) assessment was a quarterly assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 9/30/19. Resident #44 was coded as being intact in cognitive function scoring 15 out of 15 on the BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) exam. Resident #44 was coded as requiring limited assistance with one staff member with transfers, locomotion, dressing, and personal hygiene; and independent with bed mobility and meals. Resident #44 was coded is Section G0400. (Functional status) as having impairments to one side of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2019-11-14 · 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 observations and staff interview the facility staff failed to perform appropriate hand hygiene after removing dirty gloves for 1 of 38 residents in the survey sample (Resident #321). The findings included: On 11/13/2019 at 4:36 p.m., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #6 was observed applying clean gloves and remove a glucometer and blood testing supplies from the medication cart. LPN #6 and the Surveyor entered Resident #321's room and LPN #6 obtained a blood sample from Resident #321 and checked the resident's blood sample with the glucometer. LPN #6 returned to the medication cart with the glucometer. LPN #6 removed her dirty gloves, performed hand hygiene with hand sanitizer and applied clean gloves. LPN #6 obtained germicidal wipes from the container and cleaned the glucometer. LPN #6 removed her dirty gloves and applied clean gloves. LPN #6 failed to perform hand hygiene after removing her dirty gloves. LPN #6 drew up insulin into a syringe and went back to Resident #321's bedside and administered the insulin to Resident #321. LPN #6 went back to the medication cart,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · B2019-11-14 · tag F0640 — patternEncode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interview and clinical record review the facility staff failed to ensure a discharge assessment (MDS) was completed for 1 of 38 residents (Residents #2), in the survey sample. The findings included: The facility staff failed to complete a discharge MDS assessment for Resident #2. Resident #2 was discharged from the facility and admitted to another nursing facility on 07/18/19. The diagnoses for Resident #2 included but not limited to Dislocation of the right hip. Resident #2's last Minimum Data Set (MDS) was an Annual Assessment with an Assessment Reference Date of 07/25/19 coded Resident #2's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) scoring a 15 out of a possible 15 indicating no cognitive impairment. In addition, the MDS coded Resident #2 requiring total dependence of one with transfer, dressing, bathing and toilet use, extensive assistance of one with personal hygiene and bed mobility for Activities of Daily Living (ADL) care. Review of Resident #2's clinical note dated 07/18/19 read in part: Resident discharged to another facility via transport in a wheel chair.…
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
$78,455 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $78,455 — penalty dated 2024-09-18
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to SABER HEALTHCARE GROUP — 126 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 1 of 5 | 2.9 | -1.9 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 1 of 5 | 2.6 | -1.6 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 2.2 | -0.2 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 4.0 | ≈ chain avg |
The other 125 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.9★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 125; lowest-rated first.
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| BNV DYNASTY LLC | Organization | DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 01/01/2023 |
| SABER HEALTHCARE HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 11/01/2020 |
| BENJAMIN N. VOLPE FAMILY DYNASTY TRUST (DATED DECEMBER 29, 2020) | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 01/01/2023 |
| DECANTED WILLIAM I. WEISBERG FAMILY DYNASTY TRUST (DATED SEPT 30, 2020 | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 01/01/2023 |
| WIW DYNASTY LLC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 01/01/2023 |
| OHI ASSET (VA) WINDERMERE, LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER SECURITY INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/01/2020 |
| VOLPE, BENJAMIN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/01/2020 |
| WEISBERG, WILLIAM | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF; ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/01/2020 |
| NICOLUZAKIS, GREGORY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/01/2020 |
| SHG MANAGEMENT LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/01/2020 |
| JACKSON, ASHLEY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 06/28/2022 |
| SHERRING, ADAM | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 09/23/2024 |
| CITRIN COOPERMAN ADVISORS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/01/2020 |
| SABER GOVERNANCE LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/01/2020 |
| SABER HEALTHCARE GROUP LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/01/2020 |
| SHG BOA LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 12/30/2025 |
| SHG MT, LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 12/30/2025 |
| TCF NATIONAL BANK | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 12/02/2022 |
| WALKER & ASSOCIATES PC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/01/2020 |
| BIEDENBENDER, REX | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | since 12/05/2022 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 30 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.
This home reported $1.2M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 15% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in VA
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Virginia Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 495392. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-09-18, 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.