No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Richland Post Acute

1745 Pike Avenue, Richland, WA 99354 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 71 certified beds · (509) 946-8095 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (509) 946-8095 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse/neglect citation on record (F0600) — cited Aug 2024Behavioral-health or dementia-care citation — no harm found (F0758)1 actual-harm citation$59,762 in federal fines
Insights

This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Aug 2024
  • it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • it has 1 actual-harm citation
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (38) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • the CMS record shows $59,762 in federal fines (most recent 2024-08-12)
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
  • about 19% 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.

5/5
CMS overall
5 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 2 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 5 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Urgent care / clinic
1601 George Washington Way · (888) 227-3312 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
1906 George Washington Way · (509) 943-9173 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
Safeway0.2 mi
1803 George Washington Way · (509) 946-9605 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Oak Park0.3 mi
1947 Mahan Ave · (509) 942-7529 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 5 of 5

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 3 to 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating5★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased0.0%14.2%15.4%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight0.0%5.5%5.4%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%1.6%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms3.6%17.7%6.5%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury0.0%2.6%3.3%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication16.1%12.4%18.9%better
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers7.5%4.3%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control0.0%22.5%21.2%check this — see note marked star below the table
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.9%1.3%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine91.0%82.0%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission18.6%19.9%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit10.8%13.4%12.0%typical

* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.

On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.

CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

68.8% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 860 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

68.8%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
8.6%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
63.6%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.87U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.61hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.20hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.06hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 63.6% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 349 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 0.87 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 95% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 24% 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
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF68.8%CMS range 64.7–72.751.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF8.6%CMS range 6.8–10.710.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge63.6%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 discharge59.9%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge51.0%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 identified99.6%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 setting99.2%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge99.5%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.2%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization5.1%CMS range 3.6–6.67.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.161.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS 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

1.14
RN hours/ resident / day
0.57
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.52
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.23
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.79
RN hoursweekends
43.8%
Total nursing turnover
52.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 71 beds and averages 71.2 residents a day — about 100% occupied, or roughly -0 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.23 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.14 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.52 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.71 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.44 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.28 to 0.79 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 44% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

9
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-06-25)
17
at the previous standard inspection (2024-08-12)

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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.

38 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 27 are one tap away and print in full.

  • Actual harm · G2024-08-12 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
    Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the prevention, development, and worsening of a facility-acquired pressure injury (PI) for 1 of 4 residents (Resident 23) reviewed for PIs. The facility did not consistently provide ordered wound treatments, perform/document skin assessments, or obtain/implement Durable Medical Equipment (DME, medically necessary equipment used by people with a medical condition, disability, or injury) as ordered. Resident 23 experienced harm when they developed an avoidable PI that was not present upon admission. This failure placed Resident 23 at risk for further wound complication and unmet care needs. Findings included . Review of the National PI Advisory Panel's (NPIAP, the leading expert in PIs/wounds) guidelines and definitions, dated September 2016, defined PI stages as follows: • Stage 1 PI has intact skin with a localized area of non-blanchable erythema (redness). • Stage 2 PI is a partial thickness skin loss with exposed dermis (the top…

    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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-02 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to identify a change in condition for 1 of 3 residents (Resident 1) reviewed for assessments. The failure to perform an assessment disallowed an opportunity to adequately evaluate the resident's medical condition, which potentially caused a delay in treatment. Findings included . <Resident 1> Review of Resident 1's medical record showed they were admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including an upper arm fracture, pancreatic cancer, and diabetes (a disease that results in too much sugar in the blood). Review of the admission summary note dated 06/21/2025 showed the resident was alert and oriented to self, was able to conversate about their health and was able to follow directions without difficulty. The admission summary notes also showed Resident 1 had a foley catheter (a flexible tube used to drain urine from the bladder into a collection bag). Review of Resident 1's vitals sign records showed on 06/25/2025 at 7:05 AM, there was one set of vital signs…

    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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-06-25 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — pattern
    Honor 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation interview and record review the facility failed to maintain a dignified dining experience for 2 of 7 residents (Residents 25 and 215) reviewed for dignity during dining. The facility did not provide timely meals to Residents 25 and 215 who waited for their meals after the other residents had been served. This failure placed residents at risk for decreased dignity and overall, wellbeing. Findings included . <Resident 25> Review of the resident's medical record showed they were admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including osteoporosis (a disease that weakens bones and worsens over time), muscle weakness and history of a recent fall with left knee and hip pain. Review of the residents care plan dated 06/10/2025 showed the resident was cognitively intact, ambulated with a walker and required minimal assistance from staff for basic self care tasks. <Dinner Meal> During an observation on 06/21/2025 at 5:11 PM dinner trays arrived in the main dining room and facility staff passed…

    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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-06-25 · tag F0645 — pattern
    PASARR 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 review and validate the Preadmission Screening and Resident Reviews ([PASRR], an assessment to ensure individuals with serious mental illness [SMI] or intellectual/developmental disabilities [ID/DD] are not inappropriately placed in nursing homes for long term care) accuracy and have the required Level 2 referral sent if residents had a positive Level 1 PASRR as required for 3 of 6 residents (Resident 27, 19 and 47) reviewed for PASRR. This failure placed the residents at risk for inappropriate long term care placement and not receiving necessary mental health care and services. Findings included . <Resident 27> Review of the medical record showed Resident 27 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including dementia (a progressive disease that destroys memory and other important mental functions), major depressive disorder (MDD, a mood disorder of persistent feelings of sadness, loss of interest, changes in sleep affecting how a person feels, thinks 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-06-25 · tag F0655 — pattern
    Create and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to develop a baseline care plan (BCP) within 48 hours of admission to the facility for 7 of 17 residents (Resident 19, 310, 47, 165, 213, 27, and 221) reviewed for BCP. The facility failed to document resident specific goals, physician orders, dietary orders, therapy services, and social service needs to include Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR a federally mandated process that ensures residents admitted to a nursing home were properly assessed for their mental health needs and appropriate placement). Additionally, a written summary of the BCP had not been provided to the residents and or their representatives, that included the components of the BCP. This failed practice placed residents at risk for unmet care needs and potential complications in their health status. Findings included . Review of a policy titled Care Plans-Baseline, revised 03/2022, showed the BCP needed to provided effective, person-centered resident care that met…

    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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-06-25 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — pattern
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to develop and/or implement comprehensive resident centered care plans for 3 of 6 residents (Residents 21, 27 and 47) reviewed for care planning. This failure placed residents at risk for unmet care needs. Findings included . Review of a policy titled, Care Plans, Comprehensive Person-Centered, revised 03/2022 showed the facility would develop and implement a comprehensive, person-centered care plan that had measurable objectives to meet the resident's physical, psychosocial and functional needs created from the resident's comprehensive assessment. <Resident 21> Review of Resident 21's medical record showed they were re-admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including dementia with behavioral disturbance (a progressive disease that destroys memory and other important mental functions, with agitation, physical aggression, wandering, and hoarding), diabetes (a disease that results in too much sugar in the blood), depression and anxiety. 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-06-25 · tag F0847 — pattern
    Inform resident or representatives choice to enter into binding arbitration agreement and right to refuse.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to explain the arbitration agreement (a legal document that required the use of a third party to resolve a dispute) in its entirety, including the right to cancel the agreement within 30 calendar days, in a manner and language that the resident understood for 3 of 4 residents (Resident 30, 40, and 52) reviewed for binding arbitration. This failure placed the residents at risk for losing legal protection, lack of understanding of the legal document, and the right to a jury or court hearing. Findings included . Review of an undated document titled, Alternative Dispute Resolution Agreement Between Resident and Facility (ADR), showed that signing an arbitration agreement was not a condition of admission and the decision to sign the agreement was entirely voluntary. The agreement could be cancelled by the resident by delivering written notice of the cancellation to the facility no later than 30 days after the resident or their representative signed the agreement. The agreement showed the resident and/or their representative had…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-25 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide the necessary respiratory care and services consistent with professional standards of practice for 1 of 1 resident (Resident 165), reviewed for respiratory care with tracheostomy tubes (a mechanical device inserted into a surgically created opening made in the neck, known as a tracheostomy, which assists with breathing), by failing to ensure; A) residents had the required emergent tracheostomy tube equipment immediately accessible, at the resident's bedside, B) nursing staff comprehensively assessed and documented a residents tracheostomy tube care, C) nursing staff had the required training/competencies (a series of knowledge, abilities, skills, experiences and behaviors, which leads to effective performance of staff regarding resident cares) to perform tracheostomy care and emergency interventions and, D) policies and procedures for residents requiring specific types of respiratory care/services regarding emergency care along…

    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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-06-25 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure 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 expired medications were properly disposed of for 1 of 1 medication rooms (Medication Room) reviewed for medication storage. This failure placed the residents at risk for receiving expired, ineffective, and/or compromised medications. Findings included . Review of the policy titled, Storage of Medication, dated 01/2023, showed outdated medications would be immediately removed from stock and disposed of. An observation on 06/21/2025 at 2:19 PM with Staff E, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), showed the medication room contained the following: • Blood collection needles, four boxes, each containing 48 needles, expired 03/31/2025. • Adult multivitamins, one partial bottle containing 32 tablets, expired 02/2025. • Non-steroidal pain reliever, one bottle of 100 tablets, expired 03/2025. • Magnesium with calcium supplement, one partial bottle of 26 tablets, expired 09/2024. • Vitamin D, one partial bottle of 84 tablets, expired 05/2025. • Dairy lactase enzyme supplements, two bottles of 60 caplets each, expired 04/2025. •…

    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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-06-25 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolated
    Develop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
    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 influenza and pneumococcal immunizations were offered and risks and benefits of the immunizations were provided to 2 of 5 residents (Resident 30 and 42) reviewed for immunization and infection control. This failure placed the residents at risk for illness, lack of knowledge to make medical decisions, and spread of communicable diseases. Findings included . Review of a policy titled, Influenza and Pneumococcal Immunizations, revised 10/03/2023, showed the facility would offer the influenza and pneumococcal immunizations to residents. The facility would review the risks and benefits of the immunization with the resident and/or their representative. The resident and/or their representative could refuse the immunizations. Immunization declinations and the reason for the declination were recorded in the resident's medical record. <Resident 30> Review of the medical record showed Resident 30 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses…

    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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-06-25 · tag F0940 — failed to train staff — isolated
    Develop, implement, and/or maintain an effective training program for all new and existing staff members.
    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 implementation and maintenance of an effective training program for new or existing staff, prior to staff independently providing services to residents and annually, related to; A) effective communications, resident's rights/facility's responsibilities, abuse/neglect and dementia management regarding abuse prevention, infection prevention/control, and compliance/ethics program trainings for 1 of 3 staff (Staff Q) reviewed for training requirements and, B) Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI, a process to maintain and improve safety/quality of residents in a nursing home) training for 3 of 3 staff (Staff Q, O, and P) reviewed for training requirements. This failure placed residents at increased risk for unmet care needs and inadequate care from unqualified staff. Findings included . Review of the facility's policy titled, Training Requirements, dated July 2019 showed that new and existing facility staff would receive job specific training. The training would be specific to the facility's 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.

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
Show the remaining 27 citations
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-15 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to report an incident of neglect regarding a fall to the State agency as required, involving 1 of 3 residents (Resident 1), reviewed for falls. This failed practice placed residents at risk for harm and diminished protection and oversight from the State agency. Findings included . Review of the facility policy titled, Abuse - Screening, Training, Identification, Investigation, Reporting, and Protection, revised on 01/2023, showed if the allegation involves neglect, that does not involve abuse or serious injury, the incident is reported within 24 hours to the state survey agency, as required. <Resident 1> Review of the medical record showed Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with Parkinson's disease (disorder of the central nervous system that affects movement, often including tremors). Review of a comprehensive assessment, dated 12/07/2024, showed Resident 1 had severe cognitive loss. Review of Resident 1's plan of care, dated 12/17/2024,…

    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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-15 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure 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 interviews and record review, the facility failed to supervise to ensure staff provided care according to the resident's plan of care and facility policy to prevent falls for 1 of 3 residents (Resident 1), reviewed for falls. This failed practice resulted in potential injuries to Resident 1 when they fell to the floor. Failure to follow residents' plans of care placed residents at risk for injury, falls, and a diminished quality of life. Findings included . Review of the facility policy titled, Gait Belt Policy and Procedure, not dated, showed it was the policy of the facility to use a gait belt with any resident that was not independent. If the resident was unsteady with their gait or unable to transfer independently, a gait belt should be used. <Resident 1> Review of the medical record showed Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with Parkinson's disease (disorder of the central nervous system that affects movement, often including tremors). Review of a comprehensive assessment, dated…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-12-30 · tag F0660 — isolated
    Plan the resident's discharge to meet the resident's goals and 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement an effective discharge planning process that addressed the resident's goals and needs, that involved the resident and the interdisciplinary team [(IDT) a group of healthcare professionals from different disciplines to help residents receive the care they need] for 2 of 4 residents (Resident 1 and 2) reviewed for discharge planning process. The failure to develop and implement a discharge plan consistent with the resident's needs and expressed discharge goals, placed the resident at risk for decreased self-worth and dissatisfaction with their living situation. Findings included . <Resident 1> Review of the medical record showed Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including respiratory failure with hypoxia (a condition in which the body doesn't have enough oxygen in the tissues), heart disease, and kidney disease. The 10/28/2024 comprehensive assessment showed Resident 1 required substantial/maximum…

    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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-08-12 · tag F0645 — pattern
    PASARR 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 observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents Preadmission Screening and Resident Reviews ([PASARR], an assessment to ensure individuals with serious mental illness [SMI] or intellectual/developmental disabilities are not inappropriately placed in nursing homes for long term care) were correct on admission and had required level II referral if residents had a positive level I PASARR, for 4 of 5 residents (Residents 43, 5, 23, and 34 ) reviewed for PASARR. This failure placed the residents at risk of not receiving the mental health care and services appropriate for their needs. Findings included . Review of the Department of Social and Health Services, Dear Nursing Home Administrator Letter, guidance titled, Clarification to the Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR or PASRR) Level 1 Screening Process, dated 07/06/2024, showed a positive level I PASARR screen (that would then require a referral for a level II PASARR) was Any of the questions in Section 1A…

    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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-08-12 · tag F0655 — pattern
    Create and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to develop a baseline care plan (BCP) within 48 hours of admission that included resident specific initial goals and treatment plans, nor provide a summary of the required information from the BCP to the resident for 3 of 6 residents (Residents 7, 58, and 52) reviewed for baseline care plans. This failure placed the residents at risk for a lack of knowledge regarding the initial plan for delivery of care/services and unmet care needs. Findings included . <Resident 7> Review of the medical record showed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including a recent fall with a head laceration (a deep cut or tear in skin) and depression (a mood disorder that causes a persistent feeling of sadness and loss of interest). Review of the resident's comprehensive assessment dated [DATE], showed Resident 7 required extensive assistance of one caregiver for activities of daily living (ADL's) and was cognitively intact. During an interview on…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-08-12 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — pattern
    Implement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free of unnecessary psychotropic medications (medications capable of affecting the mind, emotions, and behavior) for 3 of 5 residents (23, 34 and 35) reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility failed to ensure residents had an appropriate diagnosis for use of psychotropic medications, had person-centered behaviors being monitored to reflect adequate need for the medications or implement non-pharmacological interventions to attempt prior to administering psychotropic medications. Additionally, the facility failed to complete an Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS, to assess for the presence and severity of abnormal movements of the face, limbs, and body) prior to beginning the psychotropic medications. These failures placed the residents at an increased risk for receiving medications they no longer needed and/or increased behaviors due to inadequate dosing of medication. Findings included . <Resident 23>…

    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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-12 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
    Protect 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 ensure protection of residents from their Alleged Perpetrator (AP), after allegations of abuse/neglect were reported to the facility for 1 of 6 residents (Resident 51) reviewed for abuse/neglect. This failure placed all residents at an increased risk for unidentified abuse and/or further abuse, and unmet psychosocial care needs. Findings included . <Resident 51> Review of the resident's medical record showed the resident admitted to the facility with diagnoses of a coccyx (the bone at the end of the spinal column) fracture and heart failure. The 06/26/2024 comprehensive assessment showed the resident was cognitively intact and experienced frequent pain. During an interview on 08/05/2024 at 10:59 AM, Resident 51 made an allegation against a male staff member that worked at night. Resident 51 described the staff member as light skin colored, slightly balding head, taller than average, with a mustache/beard. Later identified as Staff F, Licensed Practical Nurse. Resident 51 stated they were afraid when Staff F…

    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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-12 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to report allegations of abuse and/or neglect to the State Agency for 2 of 6 residents (Residents 27 and 52) reviewed for abuse/neglect. This failure placed the residents at risk for unidentified and ongoing abuse/neglect. Findings included . Review of the Code of Federal Regulations 483.12 (c)(1), F609, Reporting of Alleged Violations showed, facility's must Ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation or mistreatment .are reported immediately, but not later than 2 hours after the allegation is made, if the events that cause the allegation involve abuse or result in serious bodily injury, or not later than 24 hours if the events that cause the allegation do not involve abuse and do not result in serious bodily injury, to the administrator of the facility and the other officials (including to the State Survey Agency . Review of the facility's policy titled, Abuse-Screening, Training, Identification,…

    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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-12 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
    Respond 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to conduct a thorough investigation into an allegation of abuse and/or neglect and prevent an elopement for 2 of 5 residents (Resident 27 and 52) reviewed for abuse/neglect. This failure placed the residents at risk for unidentified and/or continued abuse, recurrent elopements, and unmet care needs. Findings included . Review of the facility's policy titled, Abuse-Screening, Training, Identification, Investigation, Reporting, and Protection, dated January 2023, showed that all allegation of abuse were to be thoroughly investigated. <Resident 27> Review of the resident's medical records showed they were admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including heart complications and a bladder infection. The comprehensive assessment dated [DATE], showed the resident had a moderately intact cognition, was able to understand others and make their needs known. During an interview on 08/06/2024 at 9:15 AM, Resident 27 stated their roommate…

    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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-12 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop and/or implement comprehensive resident centered care plans for 2 of 6 residents (Residents 34 and 51) reviewed for unnecessary medications and skin conditions. This failed practice put residents at risk for unmet care needs. Findings included . <Resident 34> Review of the resident's medical record showed the resident admitted with diagnoses to include metastatic (cancer spreads beyond the place where it started to other areas of your body) breast and bone cancer (a disease resulting from uncontrolled growth and division of abnormal cells), anxiety (a feeling of worry, nervousness, or unease, typically about an imminent event or something with an uncertain outcome), and elevated blood pressure (the blood pressure in the arteries is persistently elevated.) The 07/10/2024 comprehensive assessment, showed the resident's cognition was intact. A concurrent observation and interview on 08/05/2024 at 3:27 PM, Resident 34 was observed 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-12 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide 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

    Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide care and services for 1 of 2 residents (Residents 51), reviewed for skin care when they did not obtain a skin treatment order for an on-going rash for Resident 51. This failure placed the residents at risk for further skin irritation, discomfort, and pain. Findings included . <Resident 51> Review of the resident's medical record showed the resident admitted to the facility with a fracture to their tailbone and dermatitis (a term for conditions that cause inflammation of the skin). The 06/26/2024 comprehensive assessment, showed Resident 51's cognition was intact. A concurrent observation and interview on 08/06/2024 at 10:54 AM, Resident 51 was lying in bed, just had a shower, and complained of irritation under their breasts. The resident had bright red, shiny appearing skin underneath the creases of both breasts. Resident 51 stated the staff had been applying powder to their rash under their breasts but had not in a few days and thought they would since they just had a shower. A concurrent observation…

    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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-12 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure 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 provide the adequate supervision and safety monitoring for 1 of 1 resident (Resident 52) reviewed for elopements (the potential danger when a resident, often deemed impaired to make sound decisions, leaves the facility premises or safe area unauthorized, posing immediate threats to their health or safety). This failure placed the resident at risk for serious injury related to an inaccurate risk assessment for elopement. Findings included . Review of the facilities policy dated 10/2022 titled, Elopement/Wandering, showed Residents are evaluated for potential for elopement during the admission/readmission process, and when a change of condition is noted, resulting in cognitive or behavioral changes placing them at risk for elopement. <Resident 52> Review of Resident 52's medical record showed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis to include vascular dementia (Problems with reasoning, planning, judgement,…

    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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-12 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure oxygen orders were obtained, the resident's respiratory status was monitored, or the maintaining of respiratory equipment was completed for 2 of 3 residents (Residents 58 and 5) reviewed for respiratory care. were provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice. This failed practice placed these residents at risk for unmet respiratory needs and potential negative outcome. Findings included . Review of the policy titled Respiratory Treatment dated 06/22/2022, showed residents were to receive respiratory treatments and monitoring, per their physician orders and when oxygen tubing and nebulizer (a machine used to turn liquid medications into a fine mist) masks were not in use they would be stored in a bag. <Resident 58> Review of the resident's medical record showed the resident admitted to the facility with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD, a chronic lung disease that makes breathing difficult 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-12 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolated
    Provide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure dialysis (a process that removes your blood from your body, filters out toxins in a machine, and then sends your filtered blood back into your body) care and services were consistent with professional standards of practice for 1 of 1 resident (Resident 23) reviewed for dialysis care. The facility failed to administer morning medications consistently, to include insulin (a medication that helps regulate blood sugar levels) and monitoring blood sugar levels (a procedure that required a stick to the fingertip with a lancet, and a drop of blood placed on the tip of a test strip that is inserted into a machine to determine what the blood sugar level is) to the resident prior to leaving for dialysis. This failed practice placed Resident 23 at risk for complications and adverse side effects from inconsistent medication administration. Findings included . <Resident 23> Review of resident 23's medical record showed the resident admitted to the facility with end stage kidney disease and required dialysis…

    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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-12 · tag F0699 — isolated
    Provide care or services that was trauma informed and/or culturally competent.
    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 that residents who were trauma survivors received trauma-informed care in accordance with professional standards of practice by not assessing or monitoring past experiences of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder [(PTSD) an anxiety disorder that develops in some people who have experienced a shocking, scary, or dangerous event) for 1 of 2 residents (Resident 13) reviewed for mood and behavior. This failure placed residents at risk for unidentified triggers and re-traumatization. Findings included . <Resident 13> Review of the medical record showed Resident 13 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of PTSD. Resident 13's comprehensive assessment dated [DATE] showed they required minimal assistance of one staff member for activities of daily living (ADLs, daily actions like dressing, transferring and toileting) and had an intact cognition. During an interview on 08/06/2024 at 1:55 PM, Resident 13 stated they had a very…

    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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-12 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolated
    Ensure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure recommendations from the Pharmacist's monthly medication review (MMR) were reviewed and appropriately completed by the medical provider for 1 of 5 residents (Resident 23) reviewed for unnecessary medications. This failed practice put the resident at risk for receiving duplicate therapy (more than one, same class of medication used for the same indication) of depression (a persistent feeling of sadness and loss of interest) medications that were unnecessary and a negative medical reaction. Findings included . Review of a policy titled Drug Regimen Review dated 04/2019, showed the pharmacist would review medications, to include drugs used in duplication [duplicate therapy] monthly and make recommendations as needed. Then the facility would notify the physician of the recommendations and the physician would follow-up in a timely fashion. <Resident 23> Review of the resident's medical record showed the resident admitted to the facility with diagnoses of dementia (a group of symptoms affecting memory, thinking and social…

    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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-12 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolated
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure 1) the labeling of several small containers of syrup on three trays located in dry 1 of 1 dry storage rooms in the kitchen, and 2) the resident's nutritional refrigerator was kept in a sanitary manner and undated /expired foods were discarded for 1 of 1 nutritional refrigerators in the facility. These failures placed residents at risk for consuming contaminated, expired foods, and food-borne illness. Findings included . <Dry storage> A concurrent observation and interview on 08/05/2024 at 9:45 AM, showed in the dry storage room, on the third shelf, had three trays of syrup poured into small condiment containers with no dates on containers to show expiration date. Staff Y, Dietary Director, acknowledged there were no dates on the condiment containers and stated, they need to have a date. <Nutritional Refrigerator> An observation on 08/06/2024 at 11:01 AM, of the nutritional refrigerator located in the dining room showed in the freezer there were large ice cream containers brought in with only 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-12 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide 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 implement components of their infection prevention and control precautions for, 1) hand hygiene and glove change for 2 of 6 residents (Resident 3 and 23) reviewed during daily resident cares and wound care treatment, and 2) Legionella (a bacteria that can cause a severe respiratory disease) testing protocols and procedures when control measures (actions or steps taken) were not met to reduce the risk of growth/spread of pathogens (bacteria, virus or other microorganisms that can cause diseases) in water for 1 of 1 water management program (WMP) reviewed for infection control. These failures placed residents at an increased risk for exposure to cross contamination (harmful spread of diseases) and transmission of infectious diseases. Findings included . Review of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommendations titled, Clinical Safety: Hand Hygiene for Healthcare Workers, dated 02/27/2024 showed that hand hygiene was to be…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-12 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — isolated
    Make sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation and interview the facility failed to provide a functional, comfortable and sanitary environment for 1 of 1 laundry rooms (LR1) reviewed for environmental conditions. This failure placed staff and residents at an increased risk for infections related to unsanitary surfaces. Findings included . During a concurrent observation and interview on 08/07/2024 at 3:54 PM, with Staff H, Housekeeping/Laundry Director, showed a washing machine with rolled up towels on the laminate (a type of flooring) floor surrounding the base of the washing machine. The towels were soaked with water that had been leaking from the washing machine. Staff H stated that the washing machine had been leaking for a couple of months. When surveyor walked over by the washing machine, the laminate floor squished down, and a grayish sludge (a thick, soft, wet mixture of liquid) oozed out from in-between the laminate flooring. During an interview on 08/08/2024 at 4:05 PM, in the laundry room, Staff G, Maintenance Director, and Staff H, stated the washing machine had been leaking on/off for months.…

    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.

    Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-07-22 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolated
    Provide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure hemodialysis (a machine that filters wastes, salts and fluids from the blood when the kidneys no longer were working properly) care and services were consistent with professional standards of practice for 1 of 2 residents (Resident 1) reviewed for dialysis care. The facility failed to remove the pressure dressing applied to the A/V fistula (arteriovenous fistula - surgically created connection between vein and artery to allow direct access to the bloodstream for dialysis) following dialysis treatment, failed to consistently monitor the resident's condition following dialysis and to ensure facility policies and procedures were implemented. This failed practice placed Resident 1 at risk for complications and adverse medical conditions. Findings included . Review of the facility policy titled, Hemodialysis Care, last revised on 11/2023, showed staff were to assess bruit (listen for blood flow through the fistula by placing stethoscope on the fistula, any changes in the pitch might indicate a clot or narrowing of the…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-02 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide 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 interviews and record review the facility failed to timely and thoroughly evaluate and monitor a change of condition for 1 of 3 residents (Resident 1) reviewed for changes in condition. Failure to assess and monitor Resident 1 in a timely manner following a significant change of condition placed the resident at risk for a delay in medical treatment. Findings included . <Resident 1> Review of the medical record showed Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included diabetes, respiratory disease, kidney disease and heart disease. Review of Resident 1's comprehensive assessment, dated 03/12/2024, showed the resident had no cognitive impairments. Review of Resident 1's plan of care, dated 03/05/2024, showed they required maximum assistance with one staff for dressing, bathing, personal hygiene; minimal to moderate assistance with one staff for transfers and walking; stand by assistance by staff for toileting; and was independent with eating. Review of a PN, dated 04/19/2024…

    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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2023-06-09 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — widespread
    Dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure the garbage dumpster area was maintained in a manner to prevent the harborage (shelter) of pests during 4 of 4 observations made on three days of the survey. This failure placed the facility at risk for an unsanitary environment. Findings included . An observation on 06/06/2023 at 8:55 AM, showed the outside dumpster was a large metal container with two plastic lids that covered half of the surface area opening. Inside the dumpster were several bags of garbage and cartons of shakes and milk. An observation on 06/08/2023 at 12:18 PM, showed both dumpster lids were completely open that exposed the garbage. The dumpster had multiple bags of garbage inside. A concurrent observation and interview on 06/08/2023 at 1:51 PM, showed the dumpster was completely open with multiple bags of garbage inside. Staff E, Registered Dietician (RD), stated that both lids to the dumpster should be closed to prevent contamination. During an interview on 06/08/2023 at 1:47 PM, Staff F, Dietary Manager, stated that the lids to the dumpster…

    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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-06-09 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure 1 of 1 kitchen was maintained in a sanitary manner for prevention of cross contamination. The dishwasher was not maintained and repaired as needed, perishable (food that will go bad quickly) food labeling was inconsistent, expired food was observed in the refrigerator, and a staff beverage was located with clean dishware. These failures placed all residents that ate food from the kitchen at risk for food borne illnesses and a diminished quality of life. Findings included . Dishwasher During a concurrent observation and interview on 06/06/2023 at 8:55 AM, Staff F, Dietary Manager (DM), showed a discolored and frayed, eighteen by one inch dish towel, wedged into the vertical edge of the front panel of the dishwasher. The dish towel was wet when exposed to the dishwashing cycles when the dishwasher was operated. Staff F stated that the dish towel was placed there by the Maintenance Director to prevent leaks and water from being sprayed out of the dishwasher. A concurrent observation and interview on…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-06-09 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure standard infection prevention and control precautions were implemented for 2 of 2 residents (Residents 18 and 163) observed during wound care dressing changes. Additionally, hand hygiene was not performed during personal care (cleaning the private areas of a resident) by 2 of 2 staff (Staff G and Staff H) observed for hand hygiene. These failures placed residents at an increased risk for exposure to cross contamination (harmful spread of diseases) and transmission of infectious diseases. Findings included . Review of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's January 30, 2020, document Hand Hygiene Guidance, showed that Healthcare personnel should use an alcohol-based hand rub or wash with soap and water: • Immediately before touching a resident; • Before moving from work on a soiled body site to a clean body site on the same patient; • After touching a resident or the resident's immediate environment; • After contact 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-06-09 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a right calf rash was identified, the cause determined, and monitoring occurred in 1 of 1 Residents (Resident 55) reviewed for non-pressure related skin conditions. This failure placed the resident at risk for a delay in identification and treatment of new skin impairments, a delay in preventative measures put in place to prevent worsening, discomfort, and decreased quality of life. Findings included . Review of the facility policy titled, Skin at risk/skin breakdown, updated on 09/2020, showed that a full body skin evaluation would be completed upon admission, then weekly by a licensed nurse. The licensed nurse would place monitoring and ordered treatments on the treatment administration record (TAR). The policy further showed that all non-pressure related skin impairments would continue to be monitored weekly during the healing process and were to coincide with weekly skin assessments. Resident 55. Review of the medical record…

    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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-06-09 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure 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 ensure 1 of 5 residents (Resident 23) reviewed for accidents, was assessed for safe, independent use of a smoking device, after the resident's roommate reported to staff that Resident 23 had been using a vape pen (an electronic cigarette device that simulates tobacco smoking) in their room. This failure placed the residents at risk for preventable accidents and a diminished quality of life. Findings included . Review of the undated Resident Orientation Guidebook, showed No Tobacco: Smoking and the use of tobacco products are not allowed anywhere on facility grounds by the residents. Tobacco products, lighters, and matches must be given to family or friends upon admission, or we can assist with disposal. Review of the No Smoking Policy for Residents, dated 03/2020, showed No smoking or use of smoking materials is allowed on the grounds, including parking lots, except at the following locations: In personal vehicles (vehicles are considered…

    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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-06-09 · tag F0810 — isolated
    Provide special eating equipment and utensils for residents who need them and appropriate assistance.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure 1 of 4 residents (Resident 215) who utilized adaptive eating equipment was provided with the necessary adaptive equipment for eating as ordered by Staff S, Occupational Therapist (OT). Resident 215 was not provided with a plate guard (a curved assistive device that helps to keep food from falling off of the plate) for two of three meals observed. This failure placed the resident at risk for increased dependence for eating and the potential for decreased food consumption. Findings included . Review of the 02/2019 facility policy titled Assistive Devices, showed that the facility was to provide special eating equipment and utensils for residents that required them. Further review showed the assistive devices were provided to residents at each meal. Resident 215. Review of the medical record showed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including epilepsy (a brain disorder that causes uncontrolled body…

    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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“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.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • 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.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

$59,762 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $59,762 — penalty dated 2024-08-12

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 PACS GROUP — 274 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 →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 5 of 52.9+2.1 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 52.5+1.5 vs chain
Staffing 2 of 52.5-0.5 vs chain
Quality measures 5 of 54.4+0.6 vs chain
The other 273 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.9★, per CMS)
1 of 5Anchor Post AcuteAiken, SC 1 of 5Arbor Post AcuteChico, CA 1 of 5Artesia Palms Care CenterArtesia, CA 1 of 5Arvin Post AcuteArvin, CA 1 of 5Ashland Post AcuteAshland, OR 1 of 5Bakersfield Post AcuteBakersfield, CA 1 of 5Beachwood Post-Acute & RehabSanta Monica, CA 1 of 5Brookshire Post AcuteDenver, CO 1 of 5Brushy Creek Post AcuteGreer, SC 1 of 5Buckeye Care And RehabilitationLancaster, OH 1 of 5Carnegie Park Post AcutePittsburgh, PA 1 of 5Cascade Terrace Post AcutePortland, OR 1 of 5Centennial Post AcuteAnchorage, AK 1 of 5Chandler Creek Post AcuteGreer, SC 1 of 5Chehalem Post AcuteNewberg, OR 1 of 5Country Hills Post AcuteEl Cajon, CA 1 of 5Delhi Post-AcuteCincinnati, OH 1 of 5Dublin Post AcuteDublin, OH 1 of 5Edisto Post AcuteOrangeburg, SC 1 of 5Evan Terrace Post AcuteMcMinnville, OR 1 of 5Forest Acres Post AcuteColumbia, SC 1 of 5Grandview Post AcuteCookeville, TN 1 of 5Great Plains Post AcuteWichita, KS 1 of 5Hemet Hills Post AcuteHemet, CA 1 of 5Highland Hills Post AcutePittsburgh, PA 1 of 5Highline Post AcuteDenver, CO 1 of 5Johns Island Post AcuteJohns Island, SC 1 of 5Karcher Post AcuteNampa, ID 1 of 5Kennedy Care CenterLos Angeles, CA 1 of 5Kern River Transitional CareBakersfield, CA 1 of 5Lakeview Post AcuteFlorissant, MO 1 of 5Marion Valley Post AcuteMarion, OH 1 of 5Mirage Post AcuteLancaster, CA 1 of 5Monroeville Post AcuteMonroeville, PA 1 of 5Napa Post AcuteNapa, CA 1 of 5North Royalton Post AcuteParma, OH 1 of 5Northstar Post AcuteCarson City, NV 1 of 5Overland Park Post AcuteOverland Park, KS 1 of 5Pikes Peak Post AcuteColorado Springs, CO 1 of 5Ridgeway Post AcutePetaluma, CA

Showing 40 of 273; 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 / managerTypeRoleSince
APT, FREDERICKIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 08/01/2024
JERGENSEN, JOSHUAIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 08/01/2024
MITCHELL, JOHNIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 08/01/2024

CMS files one row per role, so the 4 rows in the source record cover these 3 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.

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.

$13.5M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+11.6%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$2.3M
Related-party expense19% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 6%Medicare 78%Other / private 16%

This home reported $2.3M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 19% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

$516per resident / day
operating cost
$15,682per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$583per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

Paying with Medicaid

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.

Typical monthly cost in Washington
$13,155/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$15,969/mo
Nursing home (private)
$7,600/mo
Assisted living

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 505514. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-06-25, 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.

What to do next