Lea Hill Rehabilitation And Care Center
32049 109th Pl SE, Auburn, WA 98092 · Non profit - Corporation · 36 certified beds · (253) 876-1160 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0605, F0607, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- a high number of inspection citations overall (40) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
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 | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 5 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 2 to 5 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 | 14.3% | 14.2% | 15.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 2.0% | 5.5% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 1.9% | 1.0% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 1.6% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 44.4% | 17.7% | 6.5% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 1.6% | 2.6% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 9.4% | 12.4% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 0.0% | 4.3% | 4.7% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 33.4% | 22.5% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 2.7% | 15.1% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.3% | 1.3% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 89.9% | 82.0% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 18.1% | 19.9% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 11.3% | 13.4% | 12.0% | typical |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ 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.
50.6% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 265 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 79.7% 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 118 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 0.57 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 86% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 13% 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 | 50.6%CMS range 45.6–56.6 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.6%CMS range 8.0–13.7 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 79.7% | 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 | 64.4% | 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 | 74.6% | 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 | 99.3% | 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 | 96.7% | 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 | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.7% | 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 | 1.4% | 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 | 8.6%CMS range 6.0–12.1 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.96 | 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 36 beds and averages 33.5 residents a day — about 93% occupied, or roughly 2 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 4.85 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.01 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.84 is at or above 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 4.15 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.13 on weekdays — 19% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.20 to 0.56 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 49% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
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.
40 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 29 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · G2023-04-03 · 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, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure 1 of 3 residents (Resident 23) reviewed for pressure ulcers (PU) received physician ordered wound care, and a recommended air mattress on a timely basis to prevent skin breakdown and the development and worsening of PUs. These failures resulted in harm to Resident 23 due to worsening of PU on the heels and increased risk for severe infection and further deterioration of skin integrity. Findings included . According to the 10/2022 facility policy Pressure Injury Risk Assessment residents who were determined at risk for developing pressure ulcers would have interventions documented in the Care Plan (CP) based on specific individualized factors identified in the risk assessment. According to the Heal University Wound Care Fundamentals PU stages are defined as; Unstageable PU: Full-thickness skin and tissue loss in which the extent of tissue damage within the ulcer cannot be confirmed because the wound bed is obscured by slough or…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-06-04 · 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 observation, interview and record review the facility failed to implement their abuse policies and procedures including identification of an allegation of verbal abuse and neglect, protecting residents after an allegation of verbal abuse and neglect, making required notifications, logging the allegation on the abuse/incident log, completing an incident report, a thorough investigation, and post incident resident monitoring for psychological harm for 2 of 2 residents (Resident 1 & 2) reviewed for staff and resident incidents. These failures placed all residents at risk for unidentified abuse and neglect, on-going abuse, and diminished quality of life.Findings included.Review of the 10/05/2022 facility Abuse, neglect and Exploitation policy showed the facility would provide protection for the health, welfare and rights of each resident by developing and implementing written policies and procedures that prohibit and prevent abuse and neglect. The policy showed verbal abuse was defined as the means of oral, written or gestured communication that willfully includes disparaging…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-09-19 · tag F0676 — failed to keep up residents' daily-living abilities — patternEnsure 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure 2 of 2 residents (Resident 8 & 7) reviewed for English as a second language, were provided a functional communication system. Failure to provide and follow the services which enhanced and/or ensured effective communication placed the residents at risk for unmet care needs, social isolation and a diminished sense of well-being. Findings included .<Policy>According to the facility policy titled, Culturally Competent Care, dated 09/18/2025, showed the facility would treat each resident with dignity and respect. The policy showed the facility would identify unique cultural characteristics such as language and implement appropriate communication assistance methods. The policy showed staff would consistently implement the communication methods in place for resident with each interaction.<Resident 8> According to the 07/08/2025 Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS – an assessment tool), Resident 8 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-09-19 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure cold food was held at 41-degree Fahrenheit (F) or lower during lunch preparation. Failure by the facility to ensure food was at the proper temperature when served, placed residents at risk for food borne illness, less than adequate nutritional intake, dissatisfaction with meals, and other negative outcomes.Findings included <Facility Policy>According to the facility's 09/18/2025 revised Food Temperature Policy, the facility would record food temperatures daily to ensure food was at the proper serving temperature before trays were assembled. The policy showed potentially hazardous cold food temperatures would be kept at or below 41degrees F.<Facility Lunch Preparation>Observations of the unit kitchen pantry on 09/17/2025 at 12:00 PM showed staff distributing food from the steam table in trays to load the food cart to deliver lunch trays in the hallways. At 12:02 PM, Staff removed a tray with Jello (desert) cups from the pantry refrigerator and started placing the Jello on the trays. Another tray of Jello…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-09-19 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolatedKeep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure privacy for 1 of 1 resident (Resident 7) observed for medication administration via Gastric Tube (GT -tube inserted through the wall of the abdomen directly into the stomach). The failure to provide privacy during medication administration via GT placed residents at risk for a loss of privacy and a diminished quality of life.Findings included.<Policy>According to the facility policy titled, HIPPA - Organization - Requirements, revised 09/18/2025, showed the facility would ensure compliance with HIPPA requirements for securing protected resident health information.According to the facility policy titled, Resident Rights, dated 06/20/2024, the facility would ensure all direct and indirect care staff members, were educated on the rights of residents and the responsibility of the facility to properly care for its residents. The facility policy showed the resident had the right to a dignified existence.<Resident 7>Observation on 09/17/2025 at 7:46 AM Staff F (Registered Nurse) walked away from the medication…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-09-19 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — isolatedPrevent the use of unnecessary psychotropic medications or use medications that may restrain a resident's ability to function.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to offer nonpharmacological interventions to 3 of 5 residents (Residents 3, 29, & 45), monitor specific target behaviors for 1 of 5 residents (Resident 45), complete an Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS - an assessment) for 1 of 5 (Resident 45), and monitor for adverse side effects from psychotropic medications for 1 of 5 residents (Resident 45) reviewed for unnecessary medications. Failure to monitor resident specific target behaviors, monitor for psychotropic medication adverse side effects, and provide nonpharmacological interventions placed residents at risk of mismanaged behaviors, discomfort, receiving unnecessary psychotropic medications, and a diminished quality of life.Finding included.<Facility Policy>According to the facility's Use of Psychotropic Medications policy, revised 02/19/2025, the facility would only use psychotropic medications when the practitioner determined the medication was appropriate to treat the resident's specific and diagnosed condition. The policy showed the facility…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-09-19 · tag F0628 — isolatedProvide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide the resident and/or the resident's representative and Ombudsman with a written notice of the transfer/discharge, at the time of transfer or within 24 hours, for 2 of 4 sample residents (Resident 2 & 18) reviewed for hospitalization. This failure placed the residents and their representatives at risk of not being informed of their right while hospitalized that was necessary for decision-making.Findings included .<Facility Policy>According to the facility's 09/18/2025 revised Transfer and Discharge Policy, the facility would provide transfer/discharge notice to the resident and /or resident's representative in a language and manner they could understand including reason and basis, effective date, location for the transfer/discharge, and an explanation of the right to appeal. The policy showed the facility would maintain evidence that the transfer/discharge notice was sent to the Ombudsman office.<Resident 2>According to the 01/11/2025 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 · D2025-09-19 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure 3 (Residents 2, 8, & 5) of 12 sample residents Minimum Data Sets (MDS - an assessment tool) were completed accurately to reflect the resident's condition. This failure placed residents at risk for unidentified and/or unmet care needs.Findings included .<Resident 2> According to the 06/10/2025 Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool), Resident 2 had diagnoses including a brain bleed with right side weakness. The MDS showed Resident 2 did not have a Restorative Nursing Program to maintain their functional limitations in range of motion. Review of the June 2025 RNP documentation showed restorative staff provided range of motion programs to Resident 2 up to five times a week. Review of the 05/09/2025 revised Activities of Daily Living Care Plan (CP) showed Resident 2 received range of motion for both of their arms and legs up to five days a week, to maintain their mobility. In an interview on 09/17/2025 at 9:17 AM, Staff L…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-19 · tag F0645 — isolatedPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR - a mental health screening required before transfer to a nursing home) assessments were revised to reflect mental health changes for 1 of 5 residents (Resident 8) reviewed for PASRRs. This failure left residents at risk for not receiving timely and necessary services to meet their mental health care needs.Findings included .<Facility Policy>According to the facility's 03/29/2025 revised Behavioral Health Services Policy, the facility would ensure all residents received necessary behavioral health services to assist them in reaching and maintaining their highest level of mental and psychosocial well-being. The policy showed the facility staff would review resident's medical records and obtain history from resident's family to complete PASRR screening. The policy showed PASRRs would be reviewed periodically for potential changes.<Resident 8>According to the 11/18/2024 admission 5 Day Minimum Data…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-09-19 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop and/or implement comprehensive Care Plans (CP) for 3 of 16 residents (Resident 29, 7, & 3) whose CPs were reviewed. Failure to develop comprehensive, individualized CPs to address resident care needs placed residents at risk for unmet care needs, frustration, and other negative health outcomes.Findings included.<Policy>According to the facility policy titled, Documentation in Medical Record, dated 2024, the facility would ensure medical records were accurate, relevant, and complete, containing sufficient details about the resident's care.<Resident 29>According to a 08/29/2025 admission Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool) Resident 29 received Oxygen (O2) therapy continuous and at a high concentration while a resident at the facility.Review of Resident 29's health records showed a 08/26/2025 physician order for O2 to be administered continuously. Review of Resident 29's records showed no CP for Covid 19 or oxygen therapy.Observation on 09/14/2025 at 9:22 AM showed staff removing Resident 29'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 · Dcited before2025-09-19 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to clarify physician orders to include medication dosing and pain medication parameters for 2 (Resident 45 & 3) of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications and 2 (Resident 5 & 48) supplemental residents. The facility failed to obtain/monitor labs for medications requiring lab monitoring, failed to ensure pain management included nonpharmacological interventions, and failed to ensure staff monitored for signs and symptoms of low/high blood glucose levels for 2 (Residents 3 & 29) of 5 sample residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. These failures placed residents at risk for unmet needs, and ineffective and/or delayed treatments.Findings included. <Clarifying Physician Orders> <Resident 5> Review of Resident 5’s 09/2025 Medication Administration Record (MAR) showed an 08/11/2025 order for an over-the-counter pain medication to be administered every six hours as needed for a pain level of “1-3/10” on the pain scale. The MAR showed…
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 29 citations
- Potential for harm · D2025-09-19 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents who were dependent on staff for assistance with Activities of Daily Living (ADLs - i.e. grooming, bathing, eating, etc.) received the assistance they required for 3 of 7 sample residents (Residents 2, 8, & 7) reviewed for ADLs. The failure to provide nailcare, bathing, getting out of bed, and shaving left residents at risk of embarrassment, poor personal hygiene, decreased quality of life, and other negative health outcomes.Findings included .<Facility Policy>According to the facility's 09/18/2025 revised ADLs Policy, residents who were unable to perform ADLs independently would receive the necessary services to maintain mobility, good nutrition, grooming, and personal hygiene as they required. The policy showed based on resident's assessment, the facility would ensure resident's abilities in ADLs would not deteriorate unless deterioration was unavoidable. <Resident 2> According to the 06/10/2025 Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS – an assessment tool), Resident 2 had weakness on right side of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-19 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure weekly skin assessments were completed for 1 (Residents 15) of 1 residents reviewed and 1 (Resident 5) supplemental resident who were reviewed for skin impairments, ensure post fall assessments were completed for 1 (Resident 20) of 4 residents who were reviewed for falls, ensure the therapy department provided a referral for a restorative nursing program to maintain range of motion once a resident discharged from therapy services for 1 of 4 residents (Resident 31), and ensure accurate weight monitoring was done per physician orders for 1 of 1 residents (Resident 7) reviewed for nutritional status. These failures placed residents at risk for skin breakdown, injuries, malnutrition, decreased range of motion, and decreased quality of life.Findings included.<Weekly Skin Checks> <Resident 5> According to the 08/18/2025 admission Minimum Data Set (MDS – an assessment tool), Resident 5 had diagnoses including malnutrition and cancer. 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 before2025-09-19 · 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure enteral nutrition (the delivery of nutrients through a feeding tube directly into the stomach) was administered in accordance with physician orders and professional standards for 1 of 1 resident (Resident 7) reviewed for enteral nutrition. The facility failed to accurately document the amount of enteral formula (liquid food products) and fluids a resident received were reconciled with the amount they were ordered to receive and deliver per physician order. This failure placed residents at risk for inadequate nutrition, dehydration, and other adverse outcomes.Findings included.<Policy>According to the facility policy titled, Care and Treatment of Feeding Tubes, dated 09/18/2025, the facility would ensure tube feedings were administered per physician orders. The policy showed staff would evaluate the amount of feeding administered to ensure the resident received the correct enteral nutrition consistent with and following the physician orders. <Resident 7>According to a 08/08/2025 Quarterly Minimum Data…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-09-19 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure proper storage of medications for 1 of 2 staff (Staff F - Registered Nurse) observed during medication administration and proper labeling of medications on 1 of 1 medication carts (West Medication Cart) reviewed for medication storage. These failures placed residents at risk of injury, receiving expired medications, and a diminished quality of life.Findings included.<Policy>According to the facility policy titled, Medication Storage, dated 09/18/2025, the facility would ensure all medications and biologicals would be stored in locked compartments. The policy showed only authorized personnel would have access to the medications and keys to locked compartments. The policy showed the facility would ensure all outdated and mislabeled medications were destroyed in accordance with federal and state requirements. <Staff F>In an observation and interview on 09/15/2025 at 8:59 AM Staff F prepared medications for a resident by dispensing pills and liquid medications into a small pill cup and pulling two…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-19 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure staff used appropriate Personal Protective Equipment (PPE - disposable barriers such as gloves, eyewear, and gowns used to prevent exposure to infectious materials) for 3 residents (Resident 46, 7, & 19) reviewed for Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP - an infection control intervention designed to reduce the transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms), ensure staff used appropriate Hand Hygiene (HH) during resident care/resident contact (Staff D - Certified Nursing Assistant - CNA & Staff N - CNA) who were observed for care, and staff failed to provide sanitary practices when delivering meals to residents (Staff N) who were reviewed. These failures placed residents and staff at risk for exposure to and development of contagious, communicable infectious diseases.Findings included .<Facility Policy>According to the facility's Enhanced Barrier Precautions policy, revised 12/07/2022, the facility would implement EBP to prevent…
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 · F2024-07-02 · tag F0623 — widespreadProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to implement a system to ensure residents received required written notices at the time of transfer/discharge, or as soon as practicable for 2 (Residents 21 & 29) of 2 residents reviewed for hospitalizations. Failure to ensure written notification to the resident and/or the resident's representative of the reasons for the discharge in writing and in a language and manner they understood, placed residents at risk for a discharge that was not in alignment with the resident's stated goals for care and preferences. Findings included . <Facility Policy> According to a revised 09/06/2023 facility Transfer and Discharge (including AMA [Against Medical Advice]), policy, the facility would provide a written transfer notification to the resident or resident representative in a language and way they could understand. The policy showed the notification would include the reason and basis for transfer, effective date of transfer, and the location to which 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 · Fcited before2024-07-02 · 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 and interview, the facility failed to ensure resident meals were prepared in accordance with professional standards of food safety for 2 of 2 facility kitchens. The failure to ensure surface sanitizer solutions were maintained at effective concentrations, food was stored in a manner to preserve its quality, and food preparation areas were free from potential contaminants, placed residents at risk for food contamination, food borne illnesses, and spoiled food. Findings included . Observation on 06/26/2024 at 9:12 AM showed dietary staff cleaning up after breakfast service. At that time Staff P (Dining Services Director) reached for a test strip to verify the kitchen's surface sanitizer was at the correct consistency (100-440 PPM - Parts Per Million). The test strip package was empty. Staff P then looked in the desk drawer of their office before departing the kitchen. Staff P returned at 9:16 AM. Staff P tore off a strip of orange test paper from the container and held it in a sanitizer bucket for over 10 seconds. The strip remained orange and did not turn green…
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 before2024-07-02 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — patternEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure Physician's Orders (POs) were clarified as needed for 3 residents (Residents 2, 242, 238) of 13 sample residents reviewed, followed for 6 residents (Residents 13, 240, 8, 28, 238, & 240) of 13 sample residents reviewed, and nurses signed only for care provided for 1 resident (Resident 8) of 13 sample residents. These failures left residents at risk for unmet care needs, unnecessary care, and other negative health outcomes. Findings included . <Clarifying POs> <Resident 2> According to the 05/24/2024 Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool) Resident 2 had diagnoses including heart failure and dementia. The MDS showed Resident 2 received pain medication. Record review showed Resident 2 had two orders for pain medication: a 05/20/2024 PO for a non-narcotic pain medication, give 650 milligrams every six hours as needed for pain, and a 05/20/2024 PO for an opioid pain medication, give 0.25 milliliters as needed for pain. Neither PO had parameters directing staff when each medication…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-07-02 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to consistently perform Hand Hygiene (HH) before and after resident care/contact, change gloves after dirty care/before clean care, and failed to ensure glucometers were maintained clean and sanitary. These failures placed residents at risk for facility acquired or healthcare-associated infections and related complications. Findings included . <Facility Policy> According to a facility policy titled, Hand Hygiene, revised 10/01/2022, showed the facility would perform proper HH procedures to prevent the spread of infection. The policy showed HH applied to all staff working in all locations within the facility. The policy showed that using gloves does not replace HH and staff would perform HH before and after care provision, prior to donning gloves, and immediately after removing them. The policy showed HH would be performed between resident contacts, after handling contaminated objects, and when, during resident care, moving from 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 before2024-07-02 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to obtain and/or have Advanced Directives (AD - a document describing a resident's wishes for care if they became incapacitated) readily available in resident records for 3 of 5 residents (Residents 240, 241, & 13) and 1 supplemental resident (Resident 238) reviewed for ADs. This failure left residents at risk for losing the right to have their preferences and choices honored during emergent and end-of-life care. Findings included . <Facility Policy> According to the facility's revised 03/23/2023 Residents' Rights Regarding Treatment and AD policy, if a resident had an AD in place upon admission, copies would be made and added to the chart, and communicated to the staff. <Resident 240> Resident 240 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. According to the 06/24/2024 admission Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool), Resident 240 was assessed with no memory impairment, clear speech, was understood by others, and able to understand others conversation.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-07-02 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to thoroughly investigate unwitnessed falls for 1 of 2 sampled residents (Resident 3) reviewed for falls, and 1 supplemental resident (Resident 13). Facility failure to complete thorough investigations placed residents at risk for further falls and other negative health outcomes. Findings included . <Facility Policy> According to the facility's revised 05/01/2024 Accidents and Supervision policy, the facility would implement a system to minimize the risk of resident accidents. The policy showed the facility would make a reasonable effort to identify the hazards and risk factors for each resident. The policy showed the facility would evaluate resident accident risk by examining data to identify specific hazards and risks and to develop targeted interventions to reduce the potential for accidents . The facility's 11/30/2022 Incidents and Accidents policy showed documentation and data to be collected after an accident should include the date, time, nature of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-07-02 · tag F0645 — isolatedPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR - a process to determine if a potential nursing home resident had mental health/intellectual disability needs which required further assessment/treatment) assessment accurately reflected the residents' mental health conditions for 1 (Resident 238) of 5 residents reviewed for PASRR. This failure placed residents at risk for inappropriate nursing home placement and/or not receiving timely and necessary services to meet their mental health needs. Findings included . <Resident 238> According to a 06/25/2024 admission Minimum Data Set (an assessment tool), Resident 238 had multiple medically complex diagnoses including depression and required the use of an antidepressant medication. Review of a June 2024 Medication Administration Record showed Resident 238 received an antidepressant medication for depression. Review of a 06/20/2024 Level 1 PASRR, completed prior to admission showed Resident 238 had no Serious Mental Illness (SMI) indicators. Upon admission, facility…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-02 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure Care Plans (CPs) were updated as needed to reflect current care needs for 2 residents (Residents 3 & 21) of 13 sample residents reviewed. The failure to ensure CPs were updated as needed left residents at risk for unmet care needs, frustration, and other negative health outcomes. Findings included . <Facility Policy> According to the facility's revised 11/01/2022 Comprehensive CPs policy, the facility would ensure the CP would describe the care and services each resident currently required. The policy showed the facility would develop resident-specific interventions to meet residents' care needs. <Resident 3> According to the 05/15/2024 Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool) Resident 3 could hear with minimal difficulty using hearing aids, had impaired vision, and wore glasses. The MDS showed Resident 3 had severe memory impairment and wandered occasionally. The MDS showed Resident 3 required partial/moderate assistance…
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 · D2024-07-02 · tag F0685 — isolatedAssist a resident in gaining access to vision and hearing services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure 1 resident (Resident 3) of 3 reviewed for vision and hearing were provided the assistance and/or adaptive devices they were assessed to require. This failure left Resident 3 at risk for unnecessary barriers to communication and frustration. Findings included . <Facility Policy> According to the facility's revised 11/07/2022 Hearing and Vision Services policy, the facility would ensure all residents had access to hearing and vision services, and received the adaptive equipment (such as glasses or Hearing Aids - HAs) they required. The policy showed facility staff would assist residents to use any adaptive equipment required. <Resident 3> According to the 05/15/2024 Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool) Resident 3 had severe memory impairment and medically complex diagnoses including dementia. The MDS showed Resident 3 heard with minimal difficulty when using their HAs. The revised 05/25/2022 communication Care Plan (CP) included a goal for Resident 3 to maintain the ability to make their…
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 · D2024-07-02 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY <Resident 21> According a 04/18/2024 Significant Change MDS, Resident 21 had moderate memory impairment. The assessment showed Resident 21 had a diagnosis of non-Alzheimer's dementia. Review of a revised 04/18/2024 Fall CP showed, Resident 21 was at risk for falls and had two unwitnessed falls since admission. The CP showed to keep the bed in the lowest position as a preventative fall intervention. Review of Resident 21's medical records showed a PO to keep bed in lowest position while resident was in bed initiated on 07/11/2023. Observations on 06/26/2024 at 12:59 PM, 06/27/2024 at 8:56 AM, 06/27/2024 at 12:37 PM, 06/28/2024 at 9:28 AM, and 07/01/2024 at 8:17 AM showed Resident 21 in bed with the bed raised halfway between medium and maximum height. In an interview on 07/01/2024 at 8:17 AM Staff M (CNA) stated the CP directed them to keep Resident 21's bed in the lowest position because they were a fall risk. Staff M stated the bed was not in the lowest position but should be. In an interview on 07/01/2024 at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-02 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure continent residents were provided toileting for 3 of 4 residents (Residents 339, 340, & 18) reviewed for Urinary Catheters (tube inserted into the bladder to empty the bladder) and Urinary Tract Infections (UTI). These failures placed residents at risk for UTI, dignity issues, and a decreased quality of life. Findings included . <Facility Policy> According to a facility policy titled, Activities of Daily Living (ADL's), revised [DATE], the facility would provide toileting care and services based on individual resident's comprehensive assessments and consistent with the resident's choices. According to a facility policy titled Helping a Resident with Toileting Needs, revised [DATE], the facility would assist residents with toileting needs to maintain the resident's dignity and proper hygiene. <Resident 339> According to a [DATE] admission Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool), Resident 339 was dependent on staff for transfers…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-07-02 · 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to assess, monitor, and record intake for 1 (Resident 8) of 1 resident reviewed for enteral feeding (a medical process used to provide nutrition for residents who cannot obtain nutrition orally) services. These failures placed Resident 8 at risk for inadequate nutritional support and adverse consequences. Findings included . <Resident 8> According to Resident 8's 05/22/2024 Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool), Resident 8 had impaired thinking abilities, was usually understood, and could usually understand others in conversation. This MDS showed Resident 8 had diagnoses including a stroke and was unable to move one side of their body. The MDS showed Resident 8 had difficulty swallowing and required enteral feedings via a feeding tube. Review of Resident 8's revised 03/12/2024 Nutritional Problem Care Plan (CP) showed Resident 8 was to receive 720 Milliliters (mL) of the enteral feeding formula over 12 hours. This CP showed Resident 8 was to receive 547 mL of free water administered congruently…
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 · D2024-07-02 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure 3 of 3 residents (Residents 2, 88, & 241) reviewed for oxygen were provided care consistent with professional standards of practice. Failure to provide oxygen treatments as ordered (Resident 2 & 241) and place oxygen signs outside the rooms of residents using supplemental oxygen (Residents 2, 88, & 241) left residents at risk for over or under oxygenation, respiratory discomfort, oxygen-related accidents, and a decreased quality of life. Findings included . <Facility Policy> According to the facility's 09/01/2023 Oxygen Administration policy, oxygen therapy required a Physician's Order (PO) for use. The policy showed Oxygen warning signs must be placed on the door . of the room for any resident receiving oxygen therapy. <Providing Oxygen as Ordered> <Resident 2> According to the 05/24/2024 Significant Change in Status Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool) Resident 2 had cardiorespiratory diagnoses including heart failure,…
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 · D2024-07-02 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure, 1 of 5 (Resident 13) residents reviewed for unnecessary medications was adequately monitored to prevent excessive duration of medication use. These failures placed residents at risk to receive unnecessary medications and/or adverse side effects. Findings included . <Resident 13> According to the 06/01/2024 admission Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool), Resident 13 had diagnoses including a progressive memory loss disease. This MDS showed Resident 13 was usually understood and could usually understand others in conversation. Review of Resident 13's 06/27/2024 order summary showed a 05/31/2024 Physician Order (PO) directing staff to administer an over-the-counter sleep aid medication every day. This PO showed Resident 13 was prescribed the medication for difficulty sleeping. Review of the 06/27/2024 order summary showed no directions instructing staff to monitor the amount of hours Resident 13 slept each night. Review of Resident 13's comprehensive Care Plan (CP) showed a CP goal was not developed regarding…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-07-02 · 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
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure 2 (Residents 21 & 238) of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications were free from unnecessary psychotropic medications. Facility staff failed to identify/monitor target behaviors or attempt a Gradual Dose Reduction (GDR) for an Antidepressant (AD) medication. These failures placed residents at risk to receive unnecessary psychotropic medications and experience adverse side effects. Findings included . <Facility Policy> According to facility policy titled Gradual Dose Reduction of Psychotropic Drugs revised 11/09/2022, the facility would gradually reduce the dose of psychotropic medications in an effort to discontinue those drugs. The policy showed the facility would attempt a GDR in two separate quarters (with at least one month between the attempts) within the first year of the resident being admitted or within the first year of a resident starting a psychotropic medication. <Resident 21> According to the 04/18/2024 Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool) Resident 21 had moderate…
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 before2023-04-03 · 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 and interview the facility failed to ensure expired foods were identified and discarded, did not ensure equipment was clean and secure, and ensure staff implemented proper hand hygiene practice. These failures placed residents at risk for consuming expired/spoiled foods, potential exposure to food borne illness, and safety hazards placing residents at risk for harm. Findings included . Expired food An observation on 03/27/2023 at 8:34 AM found the following foods identified as expired inside facility kitchen refrigerators; Cooked bacon, pork ham lunch meat, pickles, a pitcher of tomato juice, a pitcher of skim milk, a pitcher of orange juice, and three pitchers of instant tea. Staff S (Dining Service Director) stated in an interview on 03/31/2023 at 01:20 PM, their expectation was expired foods were removed prior to the date of expiration to prevent food borne illness. Secure and Sanitary Equipment An observation on 03/27/2023 at 8:48 AM, showed the ice machine in the kitchen was visibly soiled with a white crust. A cleaning log was available and indicated 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 before2023-04-03 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — patternRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure incident investigations were completed according to professional standards for 2 of 5 residents (Residents 11 & 6) reviewed for accidents. The failure to 1) conduct timely and thorough investigations, 2) rule out abuse and/or neglect, 3) ensure the identified resident feels safe, 4) gather statements at the time of the incident from the staff, witnesses, identified resident, and other similar or affected residents, 5) implement immediate interventions related to the incident to prevent future incidents, 6) identify the root cause of the incident, and 7) maintain documentation that an alleged violation was thoroughly investigated, placed residents at risk for potential unidentified abuse or neglect, repeated accidents/incidents/injuries and resident's diminished quality of life. Findings included . Facility Policy Review of the 2022 facility policy Incidents and Accidents showed staff should report, investigate, and review any accidents that occurred on facility property or involved a resident. Staff would assure…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-04-03 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — patternEnsure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to implement a competency-based education program to ensure 4 of 8 (Staff B, C, I & Z) and 1 supplemental (Staff D) nursing staff had the appropriate competencies and skill sets to provide nursing care and related services according to professional standards to assure resident safety and attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being determined by resident assessments and individual plans of care. The failure to ensure nursing staff were competent to: 1) perform pressure ulcer identification, assessment and documentation, 2) implement treatment and care according to physician orders, 3) perform fall/incident/accident investigations according to state and federal standards, 4) follow infection control measures and 5) provide safe transfers of residents by nurse aides, placed residents at risk for unmet care needs, unidentified and untreated pressure ulcers, unidentified change in resident conditions, unidentified risks of falls/accidents/incidents, and a decline in health…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-04-03 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to establish and maintain infection control practices that provided for a safe and sanitary environment to help prevent and contain the transmission of communicable diseases. The facility failed to ensure 1 staff (Staff C) completed hand hygiene on 2 occurrences during wound evaluation and 1 staff (Staff N) on 5 occurrences during resident care for Resident 16. The facility failed to ensure 3 staff (Staff K, L, & M) followed the Transmission-Based Precautions (TBP) outlined for Resident 178. These failures placed the residents at risk for the development and transmission of infections and compromised the safety of residents, staff, and visitors. Findings included . Hand Hygiene Facility Policy According to the Infection Prevention and Control Program (IPCP), all staff should assume that all residents are potentially infected with an organism that could be transmitted during the course of providing resident care services, and hand hygiene should be performed in accordance with the facility's established hand…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-04-03 · tag F0552 — isolatedEnsure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to inform a resident or the resident's representative of treatment risks and benefits, treatment options, and treatment alternatives in a timely manner when concerns were expressed, questions were raised, and when a change in treatment was proposed for 1 of 1 resident (Resident 178) reviewed for resident rights. These failures prevented the opportunity for the resident to exercise their right to leave their room and to make an informed decision related to fluid restriction. The delayed communication from staff brought mental, emotional, and psychosocial distress (Resident 178), and placed all residents at risk for unmet care needs and a decreased quality of life. Facility Policy The 2022 Infection Prevention and Control Program (IPCP) facility policy: Isolation Protocol showed residents were placed on the least restrictive transmission-based precaution (TBP) for the shortest duration possible under the circumstances and as recommended by the current Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines. 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 before2023-04-03 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor 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
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a process to ensure residents have an Advanced Directive (AD) for 3 of 15 residents (Residents 9, 11, & 20) reviewed for AD. The failure to obtain a copy of an existing AD and/or ask residents if they wish to formulate or decline to formulate an AD, placed residents at risk for losing their right to have their healthcare preferences and/or decisions honored if they were not capable of making their own decisions. Findings included . Resident 9 The 02/20/2023 Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool) showed Resident 9 was cognitively impaired, did not speak English and had impaired decision making. A review of Resident 9's medical record showed no AD on file to designate a decision-maker if Resident 9 could not make medical decisions about their care. In an interview on 03/27/2023 at 8:57 AM, Resident 9 was interviewed and was not able to understand the questions asked in the interview. Staff G (Licensed Practical Nurse) was outside the room and stated Resident 9 does not speak or understand…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-04-03 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to identify and assess changes in skin condition, follow Physician Orders (POs) for treatment, implement monitoring and interventions for skin care, and ensure residents received wound care consistent with professional standards of practice to prevent skin breakdown for 3 of 5 residents (Residents 20, 1 & 23) reviewed for skin integrity concerns. These failures resulted in worsening of wounds, pain, and a diminished ability to participate with therapy/rehabilitation to Resident 20, placed all residents at risk for unmet care needs and diminished quality of life. Findings included . Resident 20 According to the 03/09/2023 admission Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool), Resident 20 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with complex medical diagnoses including pain on the right leg, peripheral vascular disease (PVD), dementia (a decision-making impairment), and was at risk for malnutrition. The assessment showed Resident 20 required…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-04-03 · 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
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from unnecessary psychotropic drugs (medications that affect mental state). The failure to provide non-medication behavior interventions for 1 of 5 residents (Resident 25), and the failure to have an As Needed (PRN) psychotropic medication re-evaluated every 14 days, for 1 of 5 residents (Resident 16) placed residents at risk for receiving unnecessary medications, experiencing medication-related adverse side effects, and diminished quality of life. Findings included Facility Policy The 2022 facility policy Use of Psychotropic Medication showed a psychotropic medication affects brain activities associated with mental processes and behavior. Psychotropic medications include antidepressant (AD) and antianxiety (AA) medications. Residents would receive non-medication interventions to facilitate reduction or discontinuation of the psychotropic medication. The pharmacist would conduct monthly medication reviews of psychotropic medication for effects on the resident. Nursing staff would evaluate the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-04-03 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than 5 percent (%). Failure of 1 of 2 nurses (Staff H) to properly administer 2 of 30 medications for 2 of 4 residents (Resident 5 and 17) observed during medication pass resulted in a medication error rate of 10%. This failure placed residents at risk for not receiving the correct dose or receiving less than the intended therapeutic effects of physician ordered medication. Findings included . Facility Policy Review of the facility's 2022 Medication Administration policy, the Licensed Nurse was to compare medication source (bubble pack, vial, etc.) with the Medication Administration Record (MAR) to verify the resident's name, medication name, form, dose, route, and time. Resident 5 Observation of medication pass on 03/29/2023 at 8:40 AM showed Staff H (Registered Nurse) prepare and administer multiple medications to Resident 5, including one 500 milligram (mg) vitamin gummy. Review of Resident 5's March 2023 MAR showed directions to staff to administer two vitamin gummies…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| WESLEY HOMES | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | 100% | since 04/18/2016 |
| ANDERSON, KEVIN | Individual | CONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 04/01/1999 |
| YAMAMOTO, JAMES | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 01/01/2020 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 5 rows in the source record cover these 3 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $419K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in WA
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 Washington 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 505528. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-09-19, 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.