Marianwood Health And Rehabilitation
3725 Providence Point Drive Southeast, Issaquah, WA 98029 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 117 certified beds · (425) 391-2800 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Feb 2025
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0569)
- inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
- a high number of inspection citations overall (50) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $64,574 in federal fines (most recent 2025-02-28)
- nursing-staff turnover (66%) runs well above the national median (45%)
- about 20% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
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) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 3 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 1 to 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 10.8% | 14.2% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 7.5% | 5.5% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 1.1% | 1.0% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.9% | 1.6% | 2.0% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 3.4% | 17.7% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 0.0% | 2.6% | 3.3% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 21.5% | 17.2% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 12.5% | 12.4% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 92.8% | 93.8% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.3% | 4.3% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 24.6% | 22.5% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 16.0% | 15.1% | 17.1% | typical |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.3% | 1.3% | 1.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 76.2% | 82.0% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 21.0% | 19.9% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 24.0% | 13.4% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 0.93 | 1.33 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.13 | 1.52 | 1.80 | better |
* 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.
70.6% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 183 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 42.1% 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 76 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 0.56 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 23% 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 | 70.6%CMS range 63.2–76.6 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 8.3%CMS range 6.2–11.2 | 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 | 42.1% | 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 | 54.0% | 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 | 34.2% | 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 | 94.4% | 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 98.3% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 5.3%CMS range 3.4–9.0 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.92 | 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 117 beds and averages 82.2 residents a day — about 70% occupied, or roughly 35 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.81 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.96 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.29 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.30 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.02 on weekdays — 18% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.07 to 0.71 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 66% is well above the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
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.
50 citations, most serious first. The 13 most serious are shown; the remaining 37 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · K2024-08-01 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to: (1) Ensure water temperatures were maintained to remain within the safe temperature of 110 (+/- 10) degrees Fahrenheit (F) as required for 13 of 13 rooms sampled for hot water temperatures (Rooms 328, 306, 330, 324, 114, 428, 202, 124, 408, 422, 102, 228, & 404); (2) ensure hazardous chemicals were kept locked and secured at all times for 2 of 4 nursing units (Unit A & C); and (3) identify potential risks associated with a resident's care needs and environment to decrease the risk of falling for 1 of 6 residents (Resident 64) reviewed for falls. The facility's failure to complete repairs identified to be necessary to the hot water system and sample hot water temperatures in resident rooms placed residents at risk for serious burn or injury caused by scalding and constituted a Immediate Jeopardy (IJ). The facility's failure to secure hazardous chemicals placed residents at risk for accidental ingestion and/or skin impairment. The…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Actual harm · G2025-02-28 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to protect a resident's right to be free from verbal abuse and mistreatment for 1 of 2 (Residents 1) residents reviewed for resident-to-resident incidents. Resident 1 experienced psychological harm when they had a change in their speaking pattern and tone, flat affect, crying, expressions of re-triggering of prior traumas, and feeling distressed after repeated verbal abuse by their roommate that escalated when not addressed timely by staff. This failed practice placed all residents at risk for the potential of verbal abuse, psychological harm, and diminished quality of life. Findings included . Review of the facility policy, titled, Abuse Prohibition and Prevention, dated 01/2024, showed all residents receiving care or services had the right to be free from abuse by anyone. The facility would have processes and measures in place to prevent, investigate, and act on all allegations of abuse. The policy showed the prevention of further abuse would occur by taking measures to protect the alleged victim, as well as…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Actual harm · G2023-04-25 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure 1 (Resident 8) of 3 sampled residents reviewed for Pressure Ulcers (PUs) received the necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing, and prevent new ulcers from developing. Failure of the facility to assess skin integrity, follow Care Plan (CP) Interventions and initiate treatment orders caused harm to Resident 8 who developed an avoidable facility acquired right rib PU and a reopened a tailbone PU. Failure of the facility to complete skin assessments, prevent and treat PUs, placed Resident 8 and all other residents at risk for pressure ulcer development, increased risk for infection, and diminished quality of life. Findings included . <Facility Pressure Ulcer Policy> The facility's 01/2023 PU policy showed that the resident would not develop PU's and the facility would provide care and services consistent with professional standards of practice. A PU refers to localized damage to the skin and/or underlying soft tissue usually over a bony…
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 · E2025-11-21 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — patternImplement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
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 establish an infection prevention and control program that included developing an antibiotic stewardship program to promote appropriate use of antibiotics and reduce the risk of unnecessary antibiotic use for 2 (Resident 74 & 38) of 3 residents reviewed for unnecessary antibiotics and 2 (September and October 2025) of 3 months of Infection Control (IC) documents reviewed. This failure placed residents at risk for potential adverse outcomes associated with the inappropriate/unnecessary use of antibiotics and placed residents at a greater risk of developing antibiotic resistance. Finings included .<Policy>Review of the revised 06/11/2025, Antibiotic Stewardship facility policy showed the facility would promote appropriate use of antibiotics and reduce the possible adverse side effects with antibiotic use. The policy showed the facility would review new antibiotic orders and criteria for prescribing of antibiotics daily and track measure outcome…
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 before2025-11-21 · 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 implement a system to ensure Advanced Directives (AD) were in place for 3 of 5 residents (Residents 18, 5 & 30) reviewed for ADs. The facility failed to provide information indicating residents were informed, educated, or offered assistance to formulate an AD. This failure placed residents at risk of losing their right to have their stated preferences/decisions honored regarding medical treatment and end-of-life care.Findings included.<Facility Policy>Review of the facility's Advanced Directive and Associated Documentation policy, revised 12/2023, showed the facility staff would provide the resident/family with written information regarding their right to formulate an AD and document in the resident's record, at the time of admission, that the resident/family was provided with AD information. The policy showed a copy of the resident's AD would be obtained and placed in the resident's record.<Resident 18> According to the [DATE] Annual Minimum Data Set…
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 · D2025-11-21 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain a homelike environment for 4 of 4 units (Units 100, 200, 300 and 400) reviewed. The failure to provide necessary maintenance and repairs in pantry areas and resident rooms for damaged walls, carpets, and furniture left residents at risk for a diminished homelike environment.Findings included .<Facility Policy>According to the facility's October 04, 2016, Resident Rights policy, the facility would provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment.<Units 100 and 200 Pantry/Bistro> Observations on 11/18/2025 at 10:52 AM, 11/19/2025 at 8:58 AM, and 11/20/2025 at 8:44 AM of the Bistro area (an area accessible to residents and used as a designated pantry for Units 100 and 200) showed 4 of 4 tables were soiled with dried spill marks and food debris during each observation. During each observation, residents were seen sitting in the bistro area. The refrigerator/freezer was labelled Attn: Staff Access Only and stocked 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 · D2025-11-21 · 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 call report to the hospital regarding the resident's status for 6 of 6 residents (Residents 38, 11, 8, 74, 9, & 22) and provide a written transfer notice to 3 of 6 residents (Residents 8, 74, & 9) reviewed for discharge process. Failure to call report to the receiving hospital placed residents at risk of a break in communication and continuity of care. Failure to ensure written notification was provided to the resident/resident representative, in a language and manner they understood, placed residents at risk for not having an opportunity to make informed decisions about their transfer/discharge rights.Findings included .<Policy>According to the facility policy titled, Transfer or Discharge Notice, dated 09/2012, the facility would provide the resident or resident representative the name, address, and telephone number of the state health department agency designated to handle appeals of transfers and discharges. According to the facility policy titled,…
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 · D2025-11-21 · tag F0644 — isolatedCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure Preadmission Screening and Resident Review level II (PASRR -federal requirement to help ensure that individuals who have a mental disorder or intellectual disabilities are not inappropriately placed in nursing homes for long term care) coordination was completed prior to admission to the facility for 1 of 5 residents (Resident 28) reviewed for PASRR. Failure to ensure PASRR II completion prior to admission placed residents at risks for unmet mental health care needs.Findings included.<Policy>POLICY?????????<Resident 28>According to the 10/28/2025 admission Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool) Resident 28 admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The MDS showed Resident 28 had a diagnosis of Depression.Review of Resident 28's health records showed a 10/20/2025 PASRR I that indicated Resident 28 had a Serious Mental Illness (SMI). The PASRR I showed a level II evaluation was required for SMI. Resident 28's health records showed no PASRR II was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-11-21 · 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 (CP) were updated and/or revised, as needed for 2 of 5 sample residents (Residents 22 & 75) reviewed for CPs, and conduct timely Care Conferences (CC) with the residents Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) present to ensure person-centered care for 2 of 5 sample residents (Resident 75 & 28) who were reviewed for CC's. This failure left residents at risk for unmet care needs, inappropriate care, and other negative health outcomes.<Facility Policy>Review of the Comprehensive Person-Centered Care Planning policy, revised August 2017, showed the facility would provide advance notice for and conduct care planning conferences with each resident and/or their representative and the IDT to both create and review the residents' person-centered care needs and preferences and revise when additions were necessary.<Care Plans> <Resident 22> According to the 09/06/2025 Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool), Resident 22 was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-11-21 · 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure physician orders were administered as prescribed for 2 (Residents 9 & 12) of 19 sample residents, failed to obtain physician orders for treatment for 1 (Resident 74) of 19 sample residents, and failed to clarify physician orders for 1 (Resident 30) of 19 sample residents. These failures placed residents at risk for medication errors, delayed treatment, and other negative health outcomes.Findings included .<Administering Physician Orders> <Resident 9> According to the 09/02/2025 Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS – an assessment tool), Resident 9 had heart and lung conditions including heart failure. Review of Resident 9's physician orders showed an 08/18/2025 order for a medication to slow their heart rate and reduce the force of their heart beat, with instructions to hold the medication if the systolic blood pressure (a measure of the pressure inside the arteries when the heart squeezes) was less than 110 mmHg (millimeters of mercury) or heart rate was less than 60 beats per minute. The physician orders…
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 before2025-11-21 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide assistance with Activities of Daily Living (ADL) for 3 of 5 residents (Residents 22, 38, & 10) reviewed who were dependent on staff for daily cares. The failure to provide assistance with ADLs placed residents at risk for poor hygiene, diminished feeling of self-worth, and a decreased quality of life.Findings included .<Resident 22> According to the 09/06/2025 Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool), Resident 22 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with multiple medically complex conditions including paraplegia (unable to move both legs), a blood clotting disorder and anxiety disorder. Resident 22 needed staff to perform all effort required to dress their lower extremities and apply footwear. Resident 22 had no impaired memory. In an interview on 11/17/25 at 10:13 AM, Resident 22 stated frustration with their inability to attend recreation activities due to their waist-high compression hose being soiled and not…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-11-21 · 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 medications were stored and labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional standards of practice. The facility failed to: (1) Label medications properly and dispose expired medications timely for 2 of 4 medication carts (Units 100 & 300) reviewed; (2) monitor the medication refrigerator temperature; and (3) secure medications found at the bedside for 1 (Resident 38) of 19 sample residents. These failures placed residents at risk for receiving compromised medications with decreased or no potency, the potential use of unsecured medications, and a decreased quality of life. Findings included . <Facility Policy>Review of the facility policy titled, Storage of Medications, revised April 2007, showed the facility would store all drugs and biologicals in a safe, secure, and orderly manner. The policy showed medications must be labeled accordingly and outdated drugs should be returned to the dispensing pharmacy or destroyed. The policy showed medications requiring refrigeration must be stored in 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 · E2025-02-28 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — patternDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to implement their abuse policies and procedures regarding identification of verbal abuse, thorough investigation, protection, preventing further abuse, and timely reporting of abuse and neglect incidents for 4 of 4 residents (Residents 1, 2, 3, & 4) reviewed for resident to resident incidents. These failures placed all residents at risk for unidentified abuse, on-going abuse, and diminished quality of life. Findings included . Review of the facility policy titled, Abuse Prohibition and Prevention, dated 01/2024, showed verbal abuse included the use of oral, written, or gestured communication or sounds, to residents within hearing distance, regardless of age, ability to comprehend or disability. The policy showed all employees received training to identify abuse and neglect, and an investigation would be conducted in response to suspected abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. The investigation would be thorough, documentation of the observed 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.
Show the remaining 37 citations
- Potential for harm · D2024-09-25 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure resident responsible parties were notified when there was a change in condition or when a resident experienced a fall for 1 (Resident 1) of 3 residents reviewed. These failures violated a resident's right to have their representative involved and informed of any changes in condition. Findings included . Review of the facility policy titled, Fall Prevention and Response, revised 08/2023, showed after a resident experienced a fall the licensed nurse was required to notify the provider and the resident's representative. <Resident 1> Review of an admission Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool), dated 06/06/2024, showed Resident 1 was not able to make their own decisions, was rarely or never understood by others, and was assessed with an altered level of consciousness ( a change in the resident's awareness of the environment with reduced alertness). The MDS showed Resident 1 had impairments to one side of their body, affecting one arm and one leg. The MDS showed Resident 1 was dependent on staff for bed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-08-01 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — widespreadProvide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure sufficient qualified nursing staff were available to provide care and services for all facility residents including assistance with Activities of Daily Living (ADL) and timliness of call light response in accordance with established clinical standards, Care Plan (CP), and resident preferences. These failures placed residents at risk for unmet care needs and a diminished quality of life. Findings included . <Resident Council (RC)> Review of the 01/24/2024 RC meeting notes showed residents reported poor response times. The notes showed the administrator had coordinated with staff members who were unable to perform the needed duties and the short-term plan was for the facility to stack nursing shifts for supervision and the long-term plan was to hire staff to oversee the weekends and night shifts. During an observation on 07/23/2024 at 2:37 PM, two rooms observed to have call lights alarming. At 2:48 PM, the same two call lights were still alarming while day and evening nurses were observed to be in…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-08-01 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure resident meals were stored, prepared, and served in a sanitary manner for 1 of 1 kitchens and 1 of 4 unit pantries (Unit 400). These failures left residents at risk for spoiled or contaminated foods, and food-borne illness. Findings included . <Facility Policy> According to the facility's 07/2024 Food Storage policy all food items would be labeled with with a manufacturer's expiration date or the date of receipt. The policy showed refrigerated foods would be discarded using either the manufacturer's expiration date or seven days after the written date. The policy showed all refrigerators used for nutrition would be cleaned weekly by dietary staff. The policy showed food in facility refrigerators should be covered. <Dry Storage> Observation of the facility's dry food storage on 07/23/24 at 9:11 AM showed a box of thickening powder (used to alter the fluids for residents with swallowing difficulties) was left open. The plastic liner…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-08-01 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — patternHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
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 maintain a system to ensure resident grievances were identified, logged, and resolved timely for 4 of 4 residents (Residents 28, 31, 30, 6) reviewed for personal property and living environment. Facility failure to ensure missing personal items were found or replaced and resident environmental concerns were addressed placed residents at risk for missing property, an uncomfortable or less-than-homelike environment, and a decreased quality of life. Findings included . <Facility Policy> According to the 07/2024 Complaint and Grievance Policy, the facility would attempt to resolve all grievances as promptly as possible, but no longer than 10 days. The policy showed the facility would maintain grievance records for no less than three years. <Resident 28> According to the 05/20/2024 Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool), Resident 28 had impaired memory and was dependent on staff for self-care and grooming. The MDS 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.
- Potential for harm · E2024-08-01 · tag F0642 — patternEnsure a qualified health professional conducts resident assessments.
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 the Registered Nurse (RN) responsible for attesting to the accuracy and completeness of resident assessments was knowledgeable of the Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool) process for 3 of 3 residents (Residents 67, 20, & 45) whose Quarterly MDS assessments were reviewed for accuracy and timeliness. The facility's failure to report accurate MDS data placed residents at risk for violations of the Social Security Act. Findings included . <Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI - instructional guidelines for MDS completion) Manual> The October 2023 RAI Manual showed signatures of persons completing the assessment would certify that the accompanying information accurately reflected resident assessment information. The RAI manual showed, by attesting and signing the MDS, the RN coordinator and its signatories understood these information were used as a basis for ensuring residents receive appropriate and quality care, a basis for payment from federal funds, and that payment of such federal funds and continued…
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 before2024-08-01 · tag F0645 — patternPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure Level 1 Preadmission Screening and Resident Reviews (PASRR - a Serious Mental Illness (SMI)/Intellectual Disability (ID) screening for the need for further assessment for outside resources while in a nursing home environment) were accurate upon admission and updated as needed after a significant change as required for 3 of 5 residents (Residents 28, 45, & 32) reviewed for unnecessary medication. This failure left residents at risk for unassessed mental health needs, and other negative health outcomes. <Facility Policy> According to the PASRR facility policy, revised 01/2023, all residents would undergo a Level 1 PASRR screening prior to admission. The policy showed current residents must undergo a Level 1 PASRR if a significant change in their physical or mental condition was identified. <Resident 28> According to the 05/20/2024 Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool), Resident 28 had impaired memory and medical diagnoses including…
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 before2024-08-01 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — patternDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure Care Plans (CP) were revised and updated to reflect residents' current care needs for 6 of 21 sampled residents (Residents 28, 32, 66, 239, 64, & 189) whose CP were reviewed. This failure left residents at risk for unmet care needs, unsafe provision of care, and a decreased quality of life. Findings included . <Facility Policy> Review of the Resident Care Plan policy, revised 03/2012, showed the Resident's CP should be a communication tool for staff to provide consistency and continuity in resident care based on resident needs, values and preferences. The policy showed CPs would describe a specific plan that reflected resident preferences and care needs with measurable, specific, realistic, and achievable goals so the resident could attain or maintain their highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. The policy showed CPs should be revised quarterly and as needed. <Resident 28> According to the 05/20/2024…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-08-01 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — patternProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure 4 of 7 residents (Residents 45, 20, 58, & 239) reviewed for limited Range of Motion (ROM) were evaluated or provided care and services they were assessed to require, including Restorative Nursing Program (RNP). This failure placed residents at risk for decline in mobility and function, increased dependence on staff, and a decreased quality of life. Findings included . <Facility Policy> The RNP facility policy, revised 01/2022, showed the facility would provide restorative nursing services to promote a resident's ability to function at their highest level and live as independently and safely as possible. The policy showed residents who would benefit from RNPs included those who were at risk for functional decline, and residents with identified deficit(s) and had an established need. The Rigid Splint Application facility policy, revised 02/19/2024, showed splints applied incorrectly could cause unnecessary injuries such as skin or soft-tissue complications including pressure injuries and contact…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-08-01 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — patternEnsure 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 implement the necessary care for 2 of 3 sampled residents (Residents 45 & 26) and 1 supplemental resident (Resident 75) reviewed for Tube Feeding (TF) management including: (1) documentation of the amount of TF being administered, (2) weight monitoring, and (3) maintenance and labeling of TF tubing consistent with professional standards of practice. These failures placed residents at risk of not meeting their nutritional requirements, developing TF complications including infection, and a decreased quality of life. Findings included . <Facility Policy> The Enteral Nutrition policy, revised 01/2023, showed it was a nursing responsibility to document the amount of feeding given on each shift in the Medication Administration Record (MAR). The policy showed the facility would label TF bags with the date, time, initial of the nurse hanging the feeding, and the amount hung to prevent contamination when open feeding systems were used. The policy showed new formula would not be added to formula already hanging, and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-08-01 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — patternEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide meals that accommodated resident food preferences for 2 of 4 sampled residents (Resident 31 & 20) reviewed for preferences. This failure placed residents at risk for weight loss, frustration, and a diminished quality of life. Findings included . <Resident 31> According to a 07/12/2024 admission Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool) Resident 31 had clear speech, was understood, and able to understand others. This MDS showed staff assessed Resident 31 with no memory impairment. In an interview on 07/24/2024 at 10:07 AM, Resident 31 stated they were unhappy with the food and reported they had to keep returning their meal trays to staff as they continued to serve them food they disliked. Resident 31 stated they informed staff many times they did not like sausage or rice, but stated staff continued to serve them those food items. Observations on 07/26/2024 at 8:37 AM showed Resident 31 had a breakfast tray in front of them with only sausage left on their plate. In an interview at this time, Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-01 · 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to obtain a consent for the use of an Antidepressant (AD) medication for 1 of 5 residents (Resident 79) reviewed for unnecessary medications. This failure placed Resident 79 at risk for receiving unwanted psychotropic medications, altered level of consciousness, and a decreased quality of life. <Facility Policy> The facility's Psychotropic Medications Policy, revised 01/2023, showed psychotropic medications should only be used after careful evaluation of potential risks and benefits. <Resident 79> According to the 07/02/2024 admission Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool), Resident 79 had impaired memory and an acute onset change in their mental status, with fluctuating attention and consciousness. The MDS showed Resident 79 had medical diagnoses including uncontrolled muscle movements, schizophrenia (a mental disorder), and a history of cancer. The MDS showed Resident 79 received an AD medication during the assessment period. Review of Resident 79's Physician's Orders showed a 07/15/2024 order for an AD medication; to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-01 · tag F0569 — isolatedNotify each resident of certain balances and convey resident funds upon discharge, eviction, or death.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to notify 1 of 16 residents (Resident 10) who were Medicaid recipients, when their personal fund account balances reached $1800 (i.e. within $200 of the $2,000 resource limit beneficiaries were permitted to possess without their Medicaid coverage being impacted). This failure placed residents at risk for personal financial liability for their care. Findings included . <Facility Policy> Review of the facility's revised 05/2017 Resident Trust policy stated the facility would notify the resident and/or resident's guardian/durable power of attorney, facility social worker, and the local department of social and health services, in writing, when a resident, who was on Medicaid, reached an individual account balance of two hundred dollars less than the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) resource limit for one individual. The policy stated the notification would advise if the amount in the account exceed the SSI limit, the resident may lose eligibility for Medicaid or SSI. <Resident 10> Review of the facility's Fund Balances report…
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 before2024-08-01 · 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 provide timely assistance to formulate an Advanced Directive (AD - documentation explaining the resident's wishes for care if they were unable to speak for themselves) for 5 of 6 residents (Resident 68, 31, 75, 189, & 6) reviewed for ADs. This failure left residents at risk for unmet healthcare needs, unwanted care, and other negative health outcomes. Findings included . <Resident 68> According to the 06/13/2024 admission Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool), Resident 68 admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The MDS showed Resident 68 had intact memory. Record review showed a document scanned into Resident 68's chart on 07/23/2024 at 12:34 PM (the first day of annual survey, 47 days after admission). This document had only two typed lines. The first read Advanced directive toolkit has been provided to the resident/family. Underneath this line, someone hand wrote, Received. The second line read, Advanced directive toolkit obtained from…
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 before2024-08-01 · 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 observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to thoroughly investigate incidents for an unwitnessed fall for 1 of 9 residents (Resident 239) whose facility incident report was reviewed to rule out abuse and/or neglect. Facility failure to conduct a complete and thorough investigation as required left residents at risk for unidentified abuse and/or neglect. Findings included . <Facility Policy> The Abuse Prohibition and Prevention facility policy, revised 01/2024, showed a thorough investigation of the alleged violation would be completed and would include conducting interviews with the alleged victim and representative, accused person(s), witnesses, provider, personnel from outside agencies as appropriate. The policy showed the facility would conduct a record review for pertinent information related to the alleged violation such as progress notes and documentation sources as appropriate. The policy showed investigation results of all investigations would be reported to the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-01 · tag F0623 — isolatedProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide written transfer/discharge notices and/or complete notification to the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman (LTCO) as required for 2 of 4 residents (Residents 32 & 20) reviewed for hospitalization. Failure to provide notification to the resident and/or the resident's representative of the reasons for the discharge in writing or notify the LTCO placed residents at risk for a discharge that did not meet the resident's stated goals for care and preferences, and at risk for preventing the Ombudsman from advocating for residents. Findings included . <Facility Policy> According to the facility's 01/2022 Transfer or Discharge and Ombudsman Notification policy, when a facility resident was temporarily/emergently hospitalized , a notice of transfer must be provided to the resident or their representative as soon as practical. The policy showed copies of all transfer notices were provided to the LTCO office on at least a monthly basis. <Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-01 · tag F0638 — isolatedAssure that each resident’s assessment is updated at least once every 3 months.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to complete Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool) assessments within the regulatory timeframe for 1 of 3 residents (Resident 67) reviewed for resident assessments and timing. The failure to ensure MDS assessments were completed timely placed residents at risk for delayed care planning, unidentified care needs and services, and a decreased quality of life. Findings included . <Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI - instructional guidelines for MDS completion) Manual> The October 2023 RAI Manual showed a Quarterly MDS was a non-comprehensive assessment used to track the resident's status between comprehensive assessments that ensured residents were monitored for critical indicators of a gradual onset of significant change(s) in their status. The RAI outlined a Quarterly MDS must be completed no later than 14 days after the established Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of the assessment and no later than 92 days from the ARD of the most recent prior quarterly or comprehensive assessment (counting ARD to ARD).…
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 before2024-08-01 · 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 of 21 residents (Residents 189, 28, & 68) whose Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool) were completed accurately to reflect the resident's condition at the time of assessment. This failure placed residents at risk for unidentified and/or unmet care needs. Findings included . <Resident 189> According to a 06/12/2024 admission MDS, Resident 189 admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of a 06/23/2024 Discharge MDS showed Resident 189 was transferred to an acute care hospital with their return to the facility anticipated. Upon Resident 189's return to the facility 12 days later, staff completed a 07/05/2024 Entry Tracking MDS and indicated the resident's type of entry was an admission, rather than a reentry as required. In a joint interview with Staff T (MDS Coordinator) and Staff X (MDS Coordinator) on 08/01/2024 at 2:25 PM, Staff X stated it was their expectation an Entry Tracking MDS be coded as a reentry if a resident was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-01 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop and/or implement a comprehensive Care Plan (CP) for 5 of 21 sampled residents (Residents 68, 31, 66, 75, & 189) whose comprehensive CPs were reviewed. The failure to develop comprehensive, individualized CPs with resident-specific goals and/or interventions placed residents at risk for unmet care needs and a decreased quality of life. Findings included . <Facility Policy> According to the 03/2012 Resident Care Plan policy, within 21 days after admission, the facility would develop and implement a comprehensive CP to address all the resident's care needs. The policy showed the CP should include measurable, resident-specific goals. <Resident 68> According to the 06/13/2024 admission Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool), Resident 68 had intact memory and diagnoses including a wound infection, malnutrition, and depression. The MDS showed Resident 68 was on a physician-prescribed weight loss program. Observation on 07/24/2024 at 1:44 PM showed Resident 68 was very thin. At that time, Resident 68…
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 before2024-08-01 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure: Physician's Orders (POs) were followed for 1 (Resident 13) and POs were clarified as needed for 1 (Resident 189) of 21 sampled residents reviewed. These failures placed residents at risk for medication errors, delayed treatment, and adverse outcomes. Findings included . <Following Orders> <Resident 13> During observations of medication pass on 07/29/2024 at 8:56 AM, Staff E was observed to prepare a pain medication gel for Resident 13 by squeezing the tube into a 30-milliliter medication cup until 3/4 of the bottom of the cup was filled with the gel. Staff E did not use a dose measuring card to prepare the dose. Review of Resident 13's July 2024 Medication Administration Records (MAR) showed a 04/04/2024 order to apply four grams of the pain medication gel to the resident's right knee twice daily for pain. In an interview on 08/01/2024 at 11:36 AM, Staff L (Manager Long Term Care, Registered Nurse) stated there was no way for staff to determine how much four grams of the gel was if they used 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 before2024-08-01 · 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 provide assistance with Activities of Daily Living (ADL) for 2 of 3 residents (Residents 32 & 64) reviewed who were dependent on staff for daily cares. The failure to provide required bathing and grooming assistance placed residents at risk for poor hygiene, diminished feeling of self-worth, and a decreased quality of life. Findings included . <Resident 32> According to the 05/07/2024 Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool), Resident 32 sometimes understood conversation, difficulty focusing, and disorganized thinking. The MDS showed Resident 32 was dependent on staff assistance for bathing and required and substantial to maximal assistance for personal hygiene. The MDS showed Resident 32 had a diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (a memory impairment). The 06/15/2022 preferences Care Plan (CP) showed Resident 32 preferred showers. This CP showed Resident 32's preferences would be honored. The 06/15/2022 risk for deterioration in ADL function .' CP showed Resident 32 may require 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 · D2024-08-01 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — isolatedProvide activities to meet all resident's needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure activity programs met the needs of each resident for 1 of 3 residents (Resident 64) reviewed for activities. Failure to provide residents with meaningful activities left residents at risk for boredom, frustration, and a diminished quality of life. Findings included . <Resident 64> According to a 05/15/2024 Quarterly admission Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool) showed Resident 64 preferred to have books, newspapers, listen to music, and choose daily activity preferences. The assessment showed Resident 64 had unspecified dementia and behavioral disturbances. Review of a revised 04/16/2/2024 Resident Care Plan (CP) the Problems/Strengths focused area showed Resident 64 needed encouragement to participate in daily scheduled activities. The CP showed that Resident 64 was dependent on staff for locomotion and needed supervision for ambulation and transfers. The CP showed Resident 64 would obtain assistance in choosing and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-01 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure 1 of 4 sampled residents (Resident 12) reviewed for pain management received the necessary treatment, services, and follow-up care to manage their pain. This failure placed residents at risk for avoidable pain and a diminished quality of life. Findings included . <Facility Policy> According to the 08/2024 Pain Management Policy, its purpose was to establish how residents would be assessed, care planned, and treated in accordance with professional standards of practice. The policy showed resident choices would be honored related to pain management. The policy showed a resident who had a major change in pain status should be placed on alert charting and their pain should be assessed every shift while on alert. <Resident 12> According to the 05/29/2024 Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool), Resident 12 had clear speech, intact memory, and with medical conditions including chronic pain and discomfort due to osteoarthritis (joint pain and stiffness). The MDS showed Resident 12 had limited…
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 before2024-08-01 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were stored, labeled, and dated when opened and/or discarded when expired for 3 of 4 medication carts (Unit A, Unit B, & Unit D) and 2 of 2 medication rooms (Unit A & Unit B) observed. The failure to ensure unneeded medications were returned to the pharmacy, medications carts were secured when not in use by a nurse, and medications were not left at the resident's (Resident 240) bedside placed the residents at risk for receiving unauthorized, compromised, and/or ineffective medications. Findings included . <Facility Policy> Review of a 07/2024 facility Medication Storage and Disposal policy showed all drugs and biological will be stored in locked compartments and access granted to authorized personnel only. This policy stated outdated medications were to be removed from medication carts and disposed of according to procedures for medication disposal. The policy stated all medications were to be properly labeled and stored, separated from other residents medications, and separate from food or toxic…
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 · D2024-08-01 · 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 establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe and sanitary environment to help prevent the transmission of communicable diseases. The facility: failed to ensure sharps containers were emptied before they reached an unsafe volume for 3 of 16 resident rooms reviewed (room [ROOM NUMBER], 104, & 416); maintain an environment free of uncleanable surfaces for 1 of 16 resident rooms reviewed (room [ROOM NUMBER]); failed to maintain a Water Management Program (WMP) for 1 of 1 buildings; failed to provide wound care within professional standards of infection control for 1 of 5 residents (Resident 68) reviewed for pressure ulcers; failed to ensure urinary catheter placement did not create an infection control risk for 1 supplementary resident (Resident 55) reviewed for catheter care. The failures placed residents at risk for facility acquired or healthcare-associated infections and related…
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 · D2024-08-01 · tag F0909 — failed to maintain a comfortable temperature — isolatedRegularly inspect all bed frames, mattresses, and bed rails (if any) for safety; and all bed rails and mattresses must attach safely to the bed frame.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure resident beds did not have gaps that could pose as an entrapment risk or assess the mattress used and/or obtained/purchased separately from the bed frame to ensure they were well-fitting for 1 of 21 residents (Resident 45) whose beds were observed for accident hazards. This failure placed residents at risk for injury, entrapment, or death. Findings included . <Facility Policy> The Medical Devices and Equipment facility policy, revised 07/2024, showed the facility would establish guidelines for the assessment, use, and maintenance of medical devices and equipment, including beds and mattresses, to ensure the safety and well-being of residents. The policy showed the facility would conduct regular inspections and preventative maintenance of medical devices/equipment. <Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Document> The 03/10/2006 FDA document entitled, Hospital Bed System Dimensional and Assessment Guidance to Reduce Entrapment, identified seven potential zones of entrapment: Zone 1- Within the Rail, Zone 2-…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-04-12 · tag F0624 — isolatedPrepare residents for a safe transfer or discharge from the nursing home.
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 safe discharge for 1 of 3 residents (Resident 1) reviewed for discharges. The facility failed to ensure the Home Health Agency (HHA) was provided with all required information and documents to initiate home services as expected after discharge and failed to ensure indwelling catheter care education was provided and documented as provided to the Collateral Contact (CC). These failures placed the resident at risk for unmet care needs after discharge, potential for re-hospitalization, distress, and diminished quality of life. Findings included . Review of the facility, Transfer and Discharge policy, dated 04/2024, showed all discharges would be consistent with the needs of the resident and in conformance with the policy. The policy showed transfer documentation and appropriate medical information would be noted in the medical record and include all special instructions or precautions for on-going care. The policy showed the facility would provide sufficient preparation for the resident or the resident representative,…
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 · D2023-04-25 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide care in a manner that promoted resident dignity for 1 of 2 (Resident 74) sampled residents. Facility failure to fully dress Resident 74 left them at risk for feelings of embarrassment, helplessness, and diminished self-worth. Findings included . <Resident 74> According to the 03/21/2023 admission Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool), Resident 74 had diagnoses of dementia, and required extensive physical assistance with activities of daily living including dressing. This assessment showed Resident 74 never or rarely made decisions and required assistance with cues and supervision. According to the 04/17/2023 Pocket Care Guide (a document providing facility staff directions for care) Resident 74 required supervision assistance from staff related to dressing. On 04/18/2023 at 9:30 AM and 04/19/2023 at 8:59 AM, Resident 74 was observed dressed in a t-shirt and brief. Resident 74 was observed ambulating independently around their room from the hallway in t-shirt and brief. The door to their room was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-04-25 · 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
Based on observation, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to investigate falls and/or injuries of unknown origin to determine cause, rule out abuse, and implement interventions to prevent reoccurrence for 3 of 18 (Residents 64, 234, & 23) sampled residents reviewed. The failure to initiate and conduct a thorough investigation, initiate appropriate corrective actions, and outline all contributing factors regarding unwitnessed falls (Resident 64), skin tears (Resident 234 & 23), and bruising (Resident 23) placed the residents at risk for recurrent falls with potential for significant injury and unidentified abuse or neglect. Findings included . <Facility Policy> Review of the undated Providence Home and Community Care Event Reporting using Datix [facility's incident reporting system] policy identified the facility's process for investigation of adverse events. The policy showed investigations would include interviewing applicable staff including involved caregivers; inspect, review, and secure all relevant material, equipment, and devices; and document findings,…
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 · D2023-04-25 · tag F0625 — isolatedNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents and/or resident representatives received bed hold notification for 3 of 6 (Residents 7, 58 & 64) residents reviewed for transfers, discharges, and hospitalizations. This failure placed the residents and/or their resident representatives at risk for lack of knowledge regarding their right to hold their bed during transfers, discharges, and hospitalizations. Findings included . <Facility Policy> The 02/2022 Skilled Nursing Facility Bed Hold and Return To Facility policy showed residents and their representatives were provided with bed hold and return information before a hospital transfer. The policy outlined staff were educated about the resident's bed hold and return rights to ensure this information was provided at the time a resident left the facility. <Resident 7> Review of Resident 7's record showed they were transferred to the hospital on [DATE] and returned to the facility on [DATE]. Record review showed no indication a bed hold…
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 before2023-04-25 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to accurately assess 2 of 18 (Residents 58 & 1) residents reviewed for Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool) accuracy. Failure to ensure accurate assessments regarding oral status (Resident 58) and special treatment/procedures (Resident 1) placed residents at risk for unidentified and/or unmet needs. Findings included . <Resident 58> According to the 03/13/2023 Significant Change MDS, Resident 58 had complex medical diagnoses including a stroke resulting in difficulty swallowing and loss of function on the left arm and left leg. The assessment showed Resident 58 did not have any oral/dental issues. There was no Care Area Assessment (CAA) completed for Resident 58's oral/dental status. On 04/18/2023 at 10:54 AM, Resident 58 was observed to be edentulous (without natural teeth). Resident 58 stated they do not use or have any dentures. In an interview on 04/21/2023 at 11:18 AM, Staff G (Registered Nurse, MDS) stated the accurate assessment of a resident's oral/dental health status was very important for the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-04-25 · 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 Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) assessments accurately reflected residents' mental health conditions for 1 of 5 (Resident 64) residents reviewed for PASRR. This failure placed residents at risk for inappropriate placement and/or not receiving timely and necessary services to meet their mental health needs. Findings included . <Resident 64> According to the 01/19/2023 Significant Change Minimum Data Set (an assessment tool) Resident 64 had multiple medically complex diagnoses including anxiety and required the use of an antidepressant medication. Review of Resident 64's records showed a 03/08/2023 admission provider note stating the assessment and plan was to continue an antidepressant medication for anxiety and depression. Subsequent provider progress notes from 03/14/2023, 03/20/2023, 03/23/2023, and 03/27/2023 indicated the assessment and plan continued to include a diagnosis of depression. Pharmacist progress notes on 03/17/2023 and 03/30/2023 indicated Resident 64 was taking antidepressant…
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 before2023-04-25 · 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 comprehensive Care Plans (CPs) had measurable goals, and were complete, accurate, revised as needed, and implemented for 4 of 18 (Residents 31, 68, 64 & 66) sample residents whose CPs were reviewed. Facility failure to ensure CPs were complete, accurate, revised, and implemented left residents at risk for unmet care needs and diminished quality of life. Findings included . <Facility Policy> The 01/2023 Resident Care Plan (CP) facility policy showed the CP was reviewed, updated, and printed for the CP book at least quarterly and in the event of a significant change in condition for long-term care residents. The policy showed the CP would include measurable, specific, realistic, and achievable goals and would include a specific plan reflecting the resident preferences and care needs. The policy indicated facility staff should integrate external providers' CPs with the facility's CP in order to coordinate services with the external…
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 before2023-04-25 · 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 ensure nursing services were provided within professional standards of nursing for 6 of 18 (Residents 31, 234, 1, 68, 58 & 23) sampled residents related to bed rails, pacemakers (a small device implanted in the chest to regulate heart rate), and the failure to follow or clarify Physician Orders (POs). Findings Included . <Pacemakers> <Resident 31> According to the 03/28/2023 Admissions Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool) Resident 31 readmitted to the facility on [DATE]. The MDS showed Resident 31 had diagnoses including atrial fibrilation (irregular/rapid heartbeat), heart failure, and high blood pressure. The MDS showed Resident 31 had a pacemaker. Review of the 02/13/2023 at risk for pacemaker malfunction Care Plan (CP) showed Resident 31 had a goal to maintain a heart rate between 60-100 beats per minute. The CP directed staff to check the pacemaker as ordered. Review of Resident 31's POs showed no orders were in place to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-04-25 · 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: implement post-surgical interventions for 1 of 5 (Resident 31) residents reviewed for positioning; treat non-pressure skin in accordance with professional standards and Physicians' Orders (POs) for 2 of 5 (Resident 234 & 23) residents reviewed for non-pressure skin. These failures left residents at risk for avoidable skin issues, discomfort, and pain. Findings included . <Resident 31> According to the 03/28/2023 admission Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool) Resident 31 readmitted to the facility on [DATE] and was assessed with intact cognition. The MDS showed Resident 31 had diagnoses including an infection of an artificial joint, arthritis, and weakness. The MDS showed Resident 31 did not refuse care. According to a 03/22/2023 progress note, Resident 31 admitted to the facility for treatment of an infection of their left shoulder artifical joint. According to the 03/21/2023 hospital discharge instructions, Resident 31 needed to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-04-25 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents with urinary incontinence received the appropriate treatment and services for 2 of 3 (Residents 23 & 67) residents reviewed for urinary incontinence. Failure to provide treatment and services related to incontinence care placed residents at risk for Urinary Tract Infections (UTIs), continued decline in urinary function with potential loss of bladder control, and skin issues. Findings included . <Facility Policy> Review of the 2023 facility policy Promoting Residents' Urinary Health Status showed, the facility was to implement a prompted voiding trial once the resident was identified as incontinent [loss of bladder control]. If the resident was excluded from a prompted voiding [urinating] trial, then alternative care planning approaches were implemented. Alternatives included: bladder retraining, pelvic floor muscle rehabilitation, intermittent catheterization [a process that uses tubing to drain urine from the bladder], medication therapy, or urine containment devices. <Resident 23> According…
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 · D2023-04-25 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than 5 percent (%). Failure of 1of 2 nurses (Staff I) to properly administer 3 of 26 medications for 3 of 7 residents (Resident 46, 32,& 64) observed during medication pass resulted in a medication error rate of 11.11%. 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 . <Resident 46> Observation of medication pass on 04/24/2023 at 9:30 AM showed Staff I (Licensed Practical Nurse) prepare and administer multiple medications to Resident 46, including two tablets of medication intended for constipation. Review of Resident 46's Physicians' Orders (PO) showed staff were to administer one tablet for constipation. The April Medication Administration Record (MAR) showed staff were to administer one tablet twice daily. <Resident 32> Observation of medication pass on 04/24/2023 at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-04-25 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — isolatedKeep all essential equipment working safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to maintain the commercial cooking equipment for 1 of 1 facility kitchens in a safe operating condition. The failure to conduct maintenance and cleaning of the stove hood per manufacturer's recommendations had the potential to result in fire in the hood due to excessive grease build up which could endanger the residents, staff and/or visitors within the facility. Review of a revised 04/2023 facility Equipment Maintenance policy showed the facility was to properly maintain all equipment to ensure the safety of residents, caregivers, and visitors. This policy showed the Director of Maintenance would oversee the implementation of this policy and maintain records for each piece of equipment, including maintenance schedules, inspections, repairs, and cleaning. During initial kitchen observations on [DATE] at 9:18 AM, a label was observed on the stove hood indicating the last service date was on [DATE]. The label was marked that it would expire six…
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
$64,574 in federal fines across 2 penalties.
- $31,694 — penalty dated 2025-02-28
- $32,880 — penalty dated 2024-08-01
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to THE ENSIGN GROUP — 342 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 3 of 5 | 3.2 | -0.2 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 2.8 | +0.2 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 2.7 | +0.3 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 4.4 | -0.4 vs chain |
The other 341 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.2★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 341; lowest-rated first.
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| THE ENSIGN GROUP INC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 09/12/2024 |
| BURNAM, SOON | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE OFFICER | since 09/12/2024 |
| STOLARCZYK, LISA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/01/2025 |
| DITTAKAVI, NEELIMA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/27/2025 |
| FARNSWORTH, STEPHEN | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/20/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 9 rows in the source record cover these 5 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
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 $4.0M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 20% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. 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 505418. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-11-21, 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.