Odd Fellow Home
1229 S Jackson St, Green Bay, WI 54301 · Non profit - Corporation · 88 certified beds · (920) 437-6523 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607, F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (42) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $93,034 in federal fines (most recent 2024-02-20)
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (56%) runs well above the national median (45%)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 3 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 4 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 2 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 18.2% | 16.1% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 3.3% | 5.1% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 6.9% | 2.1% | 0.9% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 3.5% | 2.7% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 3.2% | 5.7% | 6.5% | better |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 1.7% | 3.3% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 13.2% | 18.4% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 25.2% | 16.9% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 95.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.5% | 5.0% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 31.0% | 24.6% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 11.0% | 15.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.6% | 1.2% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 87.6% | 82.2% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 18.0% | 23.1% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 13.7% | 15.5% | 12.0% | worse |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
63.6% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 143 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 60.4% 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 53 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 0.41 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 70% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 3% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 63.6%CMS range 56.5–70.8 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.3%CMS range 7.7–13.8 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 60.4% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 54.7% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 49.1% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 95.5% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 4.5% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 6.5%CMS range 3.6–12.0 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.80 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 88 beds and averages 58.7 residents a day — about 67% occupied, or roughly 29 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.74 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.68 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.43 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.46 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.86 on weekdays — 10% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.75 to 0.49 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 56% is well above the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
42 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 32 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-02 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview and record review, the facility did not provide pharmaceutical services to ensure the accurate administration of medication for 1 resident (R) (R1) of 4 sampled residents.R1 was prescribed Eliquis (blood thinning medication) 2.5 milligrams (mg) twice daily for one week following surgery. The dose was to be increased to 5 mg twice daily on 12/26/25. The dose was not increased until 12/27/25 which resulted in R1 receiving two incorrect doses of the medication.The facility's Administering Medications policy, revised 12/10/25, indicates: Medications should be administered in accordance with prescriber's orders. On 2/2/26, Surveyor reviewed R1's medical record. R1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses including post-hip arthroplasty, osteoarthritis, atrial fibrillation, and panic disorder. R1's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 12/25/25, had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 out of 15 which indicated R1 had intact cognition. On…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-11-18 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff and resident interview and record review, the facility did not report allegations of abuse to the State Agency (SA) for 2 residents (R) (R1 and R8) of 2 sampled residents.R1 had a witnessed fall on 10/17/25. The facility determined abuse occurred. The facility's 5-day investigation was not submitted to the SA within the required timeframe.R8 reported that a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) was abusive to R8. The facility initiated a grievance form but did not report the allegation of abuse to the SA.Findings include: The facility's Patient Protection Program Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation policy, initiated 3/15/24, indicates the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) or designee will report abuse to the State Agency per state and federal requirements .The facility will ensure all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment .will be reported no later than 2 hours after the allegation is made, if the events that cause the allegation involve abuse or result in…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-11-18 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff and resident interview and record review, the facility did not ensure allegations of abuse were thoroughly investigated for 2 residents (R) (R1 and R8) of 2 sampled residents.R1 fell on [DATE]. The facility determined abuse occurred. The allegation of abuse was not thoroughly investigated and inaccurate staff education was provided. R8 reported a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) was abusive to R8. The allegation of abuse was not thoroughly investigated.Findings include: The facility's Care Plans, Comprehensive Person-Centered policy, revised March 2022, indicates each resident's comprehensive person-centered care plan is consistent with the resident's right to .g. Receive the services and/or items included in the plan of care .The facility's Grievance Policy and Procedure, dated 3/18/24, indicates the resident has a right to voice grievances with respect to treatment or care that is or fails to be furnished .The facility will undertake prompt efforts to resolve any grievances residents may have…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-11-18 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff and resident interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure administration of medication in accordance with physician orders for 1 resident (R) (R2) of 1 sampled residentR2's AM and PM medications were administered late on multiple occasions. Findings include:The facility's Administration of Medication policy, dated April 2019, indicates: .Medications are administered in a safe and timely manner, and as prescribed .3. Staffing schedules are arranged to ensure medications are administered without unnecessary interruptions. 4. Medications are administered in accordance with prescriber orders, including any required time frame .7. Medications are administered within (1) hour of their prescribed time, unless otherwise specified (for example, before and after meal orders). On 11/18/25, Surveyor reviewed R2's medical record. R2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses including osteomyelitis left ankle non-healing wound, epilepsy, peripheral vascular disease…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-10-08 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, record review, and policy review, the facility did not ensure fall interventions were in place for 1 resident (R) (R1) of 4 sampled residents.R1 was assessed to be at high risk for falls and had a history of falls. R1's care plan contained interventions for fifteen-minute safety checks and grip strips on the floor near R1's bed. The interventions were not consistently implemented. Findings include: The facility's Falls and Fall Risk, Managing policy, dated March 2018, indicates: Based on previous evaluations and current data, the staff will identify interventions related to the resident's specific risks and causes to try to prevent the resident from falling and to try to minimize complications from falling. Fall Risk Factors: .2. Resident conditions that may contribute to the risk of falls include: .c. delirium and other cognitive impairment; .e. lower extremity weakness; f. functional impairments; .k. incontinence 3. Medical factors that contribute to the risk of falls…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-05-07 · tag F0882 — widespreadDesignate a qualified infection preventionist to be responsible for the infection prevent and control program in the nursing home.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interview and record review, the facility did not ensure the Infection Preventionist (IP) completed specialized training in infection prevention and control. This had the potential to affect all 59 residents residing in the facility. IP-C and Director of Nursing (DON)-B shared infection prevention duties for the facility since of March 2025. IP-C did not complete specialized training and DON-B had not begun specialized training. Nursing Home Administrator (NHA)-A indicated a permanent IP was hired and had started infection prevention and control training on 5/5/25. Findings include: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Memo QSO-22-19-NH, revised 6/29/22, indicates: In 2016, CMS overhauled the Requirements for Participation for Long-Term Care (LTC) facilities which was implemented in three phases: .Phase 3 (11/28/19) .regulations which require nursing homes to have an Infection Preventionist who has specialized training onsite at least part-time to effectively oversee the facility's infection prevention and control program. The facility did not have an…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-05-07 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure medications for 8 residents (R) (R13, R30, R26, R46, R14, R263, R20, and R0) in 1 of 2 medication carts were labeled and/or dated appropriately. In addition, the facility did not ensure expired treatment supplies were removed from storage in 1 of 4 medication storage areas and did not ensure medication was stored appropriately. Medication was left unattended on top of the medication cart. A medication storage area contained undated and expired resident and stock medications and medical supplies. A medication cart contained unlabeled, undated, and expired resident and stock medications. Findings include: The facility's Administering Medications policy, dated 2001, indicates: The expiration/beyond use date on the medication label is checked prior to administering. When opening a multi-dose container, the date opened is recorded on the container. The facility's Medication Labeling and Storage policy, dated 2001, indicates: .3. If…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-05-07 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY 2. R39's medical record indicated R39 had chronic diabetic wounds. On 5/5/25 at 10:40 AM, Surveyor observed 3 staff (2 therapy staff and one CNA) transfer R39 without wearing PPE. R39's room did not contain a sign on or near the door that indicated R39 was on EBP. On 5/6/25 at 8:15 AM, Surveyor noted an EBP sign was on R39's door. On 5/6/26 at 10:26 AM, Surveyor interviewed DON-B who indicated PPE should be worn during high-contact cares such as hygiene, dressing, linen changes, and cares involving open areas and and body fluids for residents who are on EBP. DON-B indicated residents with wounds should be on EBP and confirmed R39 should be on EBP. On 5/6/25 at 1:07 PM, Surveyor observed CNA-R assist R39 to the restroom without PPE. When Surveyor asked CNA-R if PPE was required, CNA-R indicated no because R39 did not have any open wounds. Surveyor then interviewed CNA-T who indicated PPE should be worn if toileting or transferring a resident on EBP. On 5/6/25 at 2:30 PM, Surveyor observed DON-B and Medical Doctor…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-07 · tag F0645 — isolatedPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview and record review, the facility did not ensure a Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) Level I Screen was submitted for a Level II Screen when a 30-day hospital exemption expired for 2 residents (R) (R56 and R49) of 18 sampled residents. R56 and R49 were identified on their PASRR Level I Screens as suspected of having a serious mental illness. The facility did not submit for PASRR Level II Screens when R56 and R49's 30-day hospital exemptions expired. Findings include: 1. On [DATE] Surveyor reviewed R56's medical record. R56 had a diagnosis of anxiety disorder and was prescribed Ativan (an anti-anxiety medication). R56's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated [DATE], had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13 out of 15 which indicated R56 was not cognitively impaired. R56's medical record indicated R56 was screened for mental illness, developmental disabilities, and intellectual disabilities on [DATE] and granted a 30-day hospital exemption for a PASRR…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-07 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview and record review, the facility did not ensure ongoing communication with the dialysis center or ensure ongoing monitoring of the fistula site for 1 resident (R) (R6) of 1 sampled resident. R6 received dialysis three times weekly. The facility did not ensure ongoing communication with the dialysis center or routinely monitor R6's fistula site. Findings include: The facility's Dialysis policy, revised 7/2018, indicates: There should be a pulse, buzzing, or thrill feeling in the fistula or graft. This is the blood rushing through the area. Check the fistula or graft daily. The facility's Hemodialysis Catheters-Access and Care of policy, revised 2023, indicates: Care of arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs) and arteriovenous grafts (AVGs) .Check patency of the site at regular intervals. Palpate the site to feel the thrill or use a stethoscope to hear the whoosh or bruit of blood flow through the access. From 5/5/25 to 5/7/25, Surveyor reviewed R6's medical record. R6 was admitted to the facility 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.
Show the remaining 32 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-07 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure the accurate administration of medication for 1 resident (R) (R13) of 4 residents observed during medication administration During the AM medication pass on 5/5/25, R13 received Senna-Plus instead of Senna. Findings include: The facility's Administrating Medications policy, dated 2001, indicates: .4. Medication are administered in accordance with prescriber orders .10. The individual administering the medication checks the label three times to verify the right resident, right medication, right dosage, right time, and right method (route) of administration before giving the medication. On 5/5/25 at 9:20 AM, Surveyor observed Registered Nurse (RN)-F administer R13's medication. One of the medications administered was Senna-Plus (which is a mixture of sennosides (a stimulant laxative) and docusate sodium (a stool softener)). On 5/6/25 at 8:00 AM, Surveyor reviewed R13's Medication Administration Record (MAR) which indicated R13 should have received Senna 8.6 milligrams (mg) daily for constipation.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-07 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — isolatedImplement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview and record review, the facility did not implement their antibiotic stewardship program to ensure the accurate use of antibiotics for 3 residents (R) (R19, R122, and R264) of 6 sampled residents. R19 did not meet McGeer's criteria for a urinary tract infection (UTI) but received antibiotic therapy. The physician was not asked if the antibiotic should have been continued when R19 did not meet the criteria for a UTI. R122 did not meet McGeer's criteria for a skin and soft tissue infection (SSTI) but received antibiotic therapy. The physician was not asked if the antibiotic should have been continued when R122 did not meet the criteria for an SSTI. R264 did not meet McGeer's criteria for a respiratory tract infection (RTI) but received antibiotic therapy. The physician was not asked if the antibiotic should have been continued when R264 did not meet the criteria for an RTI. Findings include: The facility's Antibiotic Stewardship policy, revised 12/2016, indicates: .11. When a culture and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-01-09 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY [NAME] 1/9/25 Based on observation, staff interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure care plans were reviewed and revised for 3 residents (R) (R11, R5, and R3) of 13 sampled residents. R11, R5, and R3's care plans were not updated with interventions related to leaving Hoyer slings underneath R11, R5, and R3. Findings include: The facility's Lifting Machine, Using a Mechanical Policy, dated July 2017, indicates: The purpose of this procedure is to establish the general principles of safe lifting using a mechanical lifting device .Steps in procedure: .20. Carefully remove the sling from under the resident. Be mindful of the resident's position and balance, and skin . 1. On 1/9/25, Surveyor reviewed R11's medical record. R11 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease, history of left above the knee surgical amputation, osteomyelitis of left foot, and diabetes. R11's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 11/21/24, had a Brief Interview for Mental Status…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-09 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview and record review, the facility did not ensure the adequate use of assistive devices to prevent injury for 1 resident (R) (R3) of 2 sampled residents. R3 indicated the lift battery often died while R3 was mid-transfer and R3 was left hanging in the lift while staff replaced the battery. Findings include: On [DATE], Surveyor reviewed R3's medical record. R3 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses including hemiplegia (weakness on one side of the body) and hemiparesis (paralysis on one side of the body) following nontraumatic intracranial hemorrhage affecting the left non-dominant side, weakness, type 2 diabetes, acquired absence of right leg above the knee, and need for assistance with personal care. R3's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated [DATE], had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 out of 15 which indicated R3 was not cognitively impaired. R3's care plan indicated R3 was a 2 person Hoyer lift transfer when R3's left leg prosthesis was off. If…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-01-09 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, and record review, the facility did not provide appropriate care and services for 2 residents (R) (R10 and R12) of 6 sampled residents with an indwelling catheter. On 1/9/25, R10 and R12's catheter drainage bags were observed in contact with the floor. Findings include: The facility's Catheter, Urinary Policy, dated August 2022, indicates: The purpose of this procedure is to prevent urinary-associated complications, including urinary tract infections .Infection Control: .2. Be sure the catheter tubing and drainage bag are kept off the floor . 1. On 1/9/25, Surveyor reviewed R10's medical record. R10 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses including history of supracondylar fracture of the left femur, right tibial fracture, and hypertension. R10's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 12/23/24, had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 12 out of 15 which indicated R10 had moderate cognitive impairment. R10's medical record indicated R10 was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-09 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — isolatedEnsure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure a prescribed diet was followed for 1 resident (R) (R3) of 3 sampled residents. R3 was prescribed a consistent carbohydrate hydro-oligomeric diet (CCHO) (a diet designed to manage blood sugar levels in individuals with diabetes or prediabetes). R3's diet order was not consistently followed. Findings include: The facility did not have a policy regarding following diets. On 1/9/25, Surveyor reviewed R3's medical record. R3 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses including type 2 diabetes. R3's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 12/26/24, had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 out of 15 which indicated R3 was not cognitively impaired. R3's medical record indicated R3 was prescribed a CCHO diet. During in interview with R3 on 1/9/25 at 12:06 PM, staff delivered R3's meal tray. R3 took the dessert but declined the rest of the tray because R3 had ordered out for lunch. Surveyor reviewed R3's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-09 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, and record review, the facility did not maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to prevent the transmission of communicable disease and infection for 1 resident (R) (R13) of 13 residents observed during the provision of cares. R13 was on enhanced barrier precautions (EBP) which required staff to wear personal protective equipment (PPE) during high-contact cares. On 1/9/25, staff transferred and provided wound care for R13 without wearing PPE. In addition, Surveyor observed staff exit R13's room with a vital signs machine. Staff did not appropriately disinfect the machine after use. Findings include: The facility's Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) policy, dated 5/1/24, indicates: .EBP: Infection control practices requiring the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) for certain high-contact resident care activities, even in the absence of standard indications for isolation. 2. High-Contact Resident Care Activities: Activities that involve potential…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-07 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview and record review, the facility did not ensure an allegation of abuse was thoroughly investigated for 2 residents (R) (R5 and R6) of 13 sampled residents. The facility did not report a resident-to-resident altercation between R5 and R6 to the State Agency (SA) in a timely manner because staff did not report the incident timely to administration. The facility could not provide proof of education for the staff who were working when the resident-to-resident altercation occurred. Findings include: The facility's Patient Protection Program Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation policy, dated 3/2025, indicates: The facility must take the following actions in response to an alleged violation of abuse, neglect, exploitation, and mistreatment: Take appropriate corrective action, because of investigation findings .Internal Reporting. A. Employees must always report any abuse or suspicion of abuse immediately to the Administrator or Abuse Coordinator Designee. External Reporting: Initial…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-03-12 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — widespreadDispose of garbage and refuse properly.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation and staff interview, the facility did not ensure garbage and refuse were properly disposed of in outside garbage receptacles. This practice had the potential to affect all 50 residents residing in the facility. On 3/10/24, the lids on 3 outside refuse dumpsters were open and there was garbage on the ground. Findings include: During an initial kitchen tour on 3/10/24 at 10:13 AM, Surveyor and Dietary Manager (DM)-O observed 3 outside refuse dumpsters with open lids. Surveyor and DM-O observed a bag of garbage on the ground behind the middle dumpster and scattered pieces of paper on the ground around the 3 dumpsters. On 3/10/24 at 10:14 AM, Surveyor interviewed DM-O who indicated the lids were most likely open for ease of use, but should be shut to keep rodents out. DM-O went between the dumpsters and looked at the bag of garbage on the ground. DM-O stated the garbage was CNA (Certified Nursing Staff) stuff and left the bag of garbage on the ground behind the dumpster.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-03-12 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, and record review, the facility did not establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program based on current standards of practice, designed to provide a safe environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable disease and infection. This practice had the potential to affect all 50 residents residing in the facility. The facility did not have a system for preventing the growth and spread of Legionella in the facility's water system. The facility's Water Management Plan (WMP) was not based on current standards of practice and did not: Describe the building's water system using text and an accurate flow diagram of the system; Include an assessment of the facility's water system to identify all locations where Legionella could grow and spread; Maintain acceptable ranges of control limits (temperature ranges) and corrective actions when control limits are not met; Include a process to confirm the WMP is being implemented and is effective. Findings include: The 7/6/18 revised Centers for Medicaid &…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-03-12 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — patternHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff and resident interview, and record review, the facility did not promote and facilitate resident self-determination for 6 Residents (R) (R1, R4, R10, R25, R27, and R39) of 6 residents. Staff did not allow R1, R4, R10, R25, R27 and R39 to make choices regarding their meals. Finding include: 1. R1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis including dementia, anxiety, and malignant neoplasm of transverse colon. R1's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 1/24/24, contained a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 10 out of 15 which indicated R1 had moderate cognitive impairment. R1 had an activated power of attorney for healthcare (POAHC). R1's plan of care indicated R1 had a 2 gm (gram) (2000 mg (milligrams)) NA (sodium), CCHO (carbohydrate-controlled), mechanical soft diet with regular/thin liquids. R1's plan of care indicated R1 should consume adequate caloric intake and the nutrients should meet R1's metabolic needs. According to the lunch menu on 3/11/24,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-03-12 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — patternHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff and resident interview and record review, the facility did not make a prompt effort to resolve grievances for 5 Residents (R) (R210, R211, R28, R209 and R13) of 7 sampled residents. R210 reported to staff that R210 was missing numerous articles of clothing. The facility did not resolve the grievance in a timely manner. R211 reported to staff that R211 was missing a nightgown. The facility did not resolve the grievance in a timely manner. R209 reported to staff that R209 was missing numerous articles of clothing. The facility did not resolve the grievance in a timely manner. R28 reported to staff that R28 was missing bed linens. The facility did not resolve the grievance in a timely manner. R13 reported to staff that R13 was missing numerous articles of clothing. The facility did not resolve the grievance in a timely manner. The facility's grievance log contained missing clothing items or laundry concerns for 1 resident in September 2023, 1 resident in November 2023, and 2 residents in December 2023. The facility was unable to provide Surveyor with grievance…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-03-12 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interview and record review, the facility did not ensure their abuse policy was implemented for 1 of 8 employees reviewed for background checks. Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA)-J's background check information did not contain an out-of-state criminal or caregiver background check. Findings include: The facility's Patient Protection Program: Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation document indicates: Screening components: .It is the policy of this facility to screen employees and volunteers prior to working with residents. Screening components include verification of references, certification and verification of license and criminal background check .Employee screening and training: Before new employees are permitted to work with residents, references provided by the prospective employee will be verified as well as appropriate board registrations and certifications regarding the prospective employee's background. The facility will not employ or otherwise engage individuals who have been found guilty of abuse, neglect, exploitation, misappropriation of property,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-12 · tag F0623 — isolatedProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview and record review, the facility did not ensure 3 Residents (R) (R204, R36, and R19) of 4 residents reviewed for hospitalizations received a written notice of transfer, including the reason for the transfer, location of the transfer, appeal rights, and contact information for the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman. In addition, the facility did not notify the Ombudsman of the transfers. R204 was transferred to the hospital on 2/27/24. R204 was not provided a written transfer notice and the Ombudsmen was not notified of the transfer. R36 was transferred to the hospital on [DATE] and 11/27/23. R36 was not provided written transfer notices and the Ombudsmen was not notified of the transfers. R19 was transferred to the hospital on [DATE] and 2/27/24. R19 was not provided written transfer notices and the Ombudsmen was not notified of the transfers. Findings include: The facility's Transfer or Discharge Documentation document, revised 12/2016 indicates: When a resident is transferred or discharged…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-12 · tag F0625 — isolatedNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview and record review, the facility did not ensure 3 Residents (R) (R204, R36 and R19) of 4 residents reviewed for hospitalizations received written information of the duration of the facility's bed hold policy, the reserve bed payment policy, and the right to return to the facility. R204 was transferred to the hospital on 2/27/24 and was not provided a copy of the facility's bed hold policy. R36 was transferred to the hospital on [DATE] and 11/27/23 and was not provided copies of the facility's bed hold policy. R19 was transferred to the hospital on [DATE] and 2/27/23 and was not provided copies of the facility's bed hold policy. Findings include: The facility's Bed-Holds and Returns policy, revised 3/2022, indicates: Resident and/or representative are informed (in writing) of the facility and state (if applicable) bed hold policies .1. All residents/representatives are provided written information regarding the facility bed-hold policies, which address holding or reserving a resident's bed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-03-12 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, resident and staff interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure each resident received adequate supervision and assistive devices, did not ensure fall assessments were completed, and did not ensure interventions to prevent falls were implemented for 2 Residents (R) (R12 and R19) of 18 sampled residents. On 3/11/24, staff used a lift with defective brakes and a defective sling to transfer R12. Staff did not appropriately assess R19 following a fall with head injury on 2/26/24. In addition, the facility did not update R19's care plan with interventions to prevent future falls. Findings include: The facility's Safety and Supervision of Residents policy, dated 12/2007, indicates: Our facility strives to make the environment as free from accident hazards as possible. Resident safety and supervision and assistance to prevent accidents are facility-wide priorities. Resident Risks and Environmental hazards: Due to their complexity and scope, certain resident risk factors and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-12 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff and resident interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure 1 Resident (R) (R34) of 1 resident received the necessary care and services for respiratory therapy. The facility provided R34 with respiratory therapy via CPAP (continuous positive airway pressure) without a physician's order. In addition, R34's need for and use of CPAP therapy was not care planned for assessment, evaluation, or monitoring. Findings include: The facility's CPAP Therapy policy, revised 10/2010, indicates: Purpose: 1) To provide the spontaneously breathing resident with continuous positive airway pressure with or without supplemental oxygen. 2) To improve arterial oxygenation in residents with respiratory insufficiency, obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), or restrictive/obstructive lung disease .apnea .Preparation: .3) Review the physician's orders .Document the following in the resident's medical record: 1) General assessment prior to procedure; 2) Time CPAP was started and duration of the therapy; 3)…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-12 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview and record review, the facility did not ensure monitoring of a high risk medication was provided for 1 Resident (R250) of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medication. R250 had physician orders for short-acting and long-acting insulin (used to treat high blood sugar). R250's plan of care did not contain interventions to monitor R250 for signs and symptoms of hypoglycemia (low blood sugar) or hyperglycemia (high blood sugar). Findings include: On 3/12/24, Surveyor reviewed R250's medical record. R250 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including diabetes mellitus (a disease in which blood sugar levels are too high). R250's medical record contained the following physician orders: ~ Humalog Injection Solution 100 unit/ml (units per milliliter) (Insulin Lispro) (short-acting insulin) Inject as per sliding scale: if 120-149 = 2 units; 150-199 = 4 units; 200-249 = 6 units; 250-299 = 8 units; 300-349 = 10 units 350 or more *12 units & call MD (Medical Doctor),…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-03-12 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure food was stored and prepared in a sanitary manner. This practice had the potential to affect all 50 residents residing in the facility. Staff did not ensure time/temperature control foods were labeled with open or use-by dates. Staff did not wear hair restraints consistently throughout the kitchen. Kitchen equipment and food services areas were not in a clean and sanitary condition. Staff did not properly heat food in the microwave that was served to residents. Staff did not follow safe food cooling protocols. Staff were unaware of temperature requirements when testing parts per million (PPM) of the sanitizing solution. Staff did not perform appropriate hand hygiene and safe food handling practices while cooking and serving food Findings include: On 3/10/24 at 9:25 AM, Dietary Manager (DM)-O indicated the facility follows the Wisconsin Food Code as their standard of practice. 1. Open/Unlabeled/Undated/Expired Food: The…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-03-12 · tag F0851 — widespreadElectronically submit to CMS complete and accurate direct care staffing information, based on payroll and other verifiable and auditable data.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interview and record review, the facility did not ensure it completed mandatory submission of staffing information based on payroll data in a uniformed format to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). This practice had to the potential to affect all 50 residents residing in the facility. Staffing information for Quarter 1 (October 1-December 31), Quarter 2 (January 1-March 31), Quarter 3 (April 1-June 30), and Quarter 4 (July 1-September 30) of the Payroll Based Journal (PBJ) was not submitted to CMS. Findings include: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Electronic Staffing Data Submission Payroll-Based Journal, Long-term Care Facility Policy Manual, dated June 2022, indicates: Chapter 1: Overview, 1.1 introduction .(U) mandatory submission of staffing information based on payroll data in a uniform format. Long-term care facilities must electronically submit to CMS complete and accurate direct care staffing information, including information for agency and contract staff, based on payroll and other verifiable and auditable data in a uniform…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-03-12 · tag F0728 — failed to protect against nurse-aide misconduct — patternEnsure that nurse aides who have worked more than 4 months, are trained and competent; and nurse aides who have worked less than 4 months are enrolled in appropriate training.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview and record review, the facility did not ensure 1 of 5 Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs) was eligible to work in a federally certified facility. This practice had the ability to affect multiple residents in the facility. CNA-I was employed by the facility. CNA-I was not currently eligible to work in federally certified nursing homes because CNA-I's certification had lapsed. Findings include: The facility's Patient Protection Program: Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation document indicates: Screening components: Abuse Policy Components: It is the policy of this facility to screen employees and volunteers prior to working with residents. Screening components include verification of references, certification and verification of license and criminal background check. Procedure .employee screening and training: before new employees are permitted to work with residents, references provided by the prospective employee will be verified as well as appropriate board registrations and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-03-12 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — patternEnsure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, and record review, the facility did not follow menu serving sizes, individualized diets, and food preparation recipes to ensure nutritional needs were met for multiple residents residing in the facility. During the 3/10/24 lunch meal, staff did not follow menu serving sizes for residents who received chicken drumstricks as their main entree. During the 3/11/24 lunch meal, staff did not follow R1, R4, and R10's individualized diets. During the 3/11/24 lunch meal, staff did not follow a recipe when making mashed potatoes for 4 residents who received pureed diets. Findings include: The facility's contracted company's Standardized Recipes policy, dated 2/19/24, indicates: Standardized recipes will be used when preparing the menu items .3. Cooks/chefs are expected to use and follow the recipes provided. The facility's extended menu contained the lunch meal serving sizes for regular portions and mechanically altered food. Per the 3/10/24 lunch menu, the serving size for baked chicken drumsticks was 2 baked chicken drumsticks for residents on a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-03-12 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interview and record review, the facility did not ensure an allegation of neglect was thoroughly investigated for 1 Resident (R) (R204) of 1 sampled resident. The facility did not thoroughly investigate R204's allegation of neglect. Findings include: The facility's Patient Protection Program, Freedom from Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation policy indicates: It is the policy of the facility to maintain an environment where residents are free from abuse, neglect, exploitation and misappropriation of resident property and all resident, staff, families, visitors, volunteers and resident representatives are encouraged and supported in reporting any suspected acts of abuse, neglect, misappropriation of resident property or exploitation .The resident has the right to bee free from abuse, neglect, misappropriation of resident property, and exploitation as defined in this subpart .This regulation was written to provide protections for the health, welfare and rights of each resident residing in the facility. To provide these protections, the facility must develop written policies…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-09-11 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interview and record review, the facility did not implement written policies and procedures to prohibit mistreatment, neglect and abuse of residents for 3 staff (Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA)-C, CNA-D and Registered Nurse (RN)-E) of 8 staff reviewed during the caregiver program compliance check. CNA-C was hired on 8/14/15. The facility did not have a current completed Background Information Disclosure (BID) form for CNA-C. CNA-D was hired on 2/28/19. The facility did not have a current completed BID form for CNA-D. RN-E was hired on 3/4/16. The facility did not have a current completed BID form for RN-E. Findings include: The facility's undated Abuse Prohibition Policies and Procedures states the facility will encourage and support all residents, staff, families, visitors, volunteers and resident representatives in reporting any suspected acts of abuse, neglect, exploitation, involuntary seclusion or misappropriation of resident property. One of the components of the policy includes screening of potential employees. Upon a decision to hire an employee, all…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-09-11 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interview and record review, the facility did not ensure an allegation of abuse was thoroughly investigated for 1 Resident (R) (R2) of 9 residents. The facility did not conduct a thorough investigation of an allegation of abuse involving R2 when the facility did not prevent further potential abuse of R2 and other residents while the investigation was in progress. Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA)-F was not removed from resident care while the potential allegation of abuse was investigated. In addition, R2's plan of care was not changed as indicated by the facility. Findings include: The facility's undated abuse policy and procedure indicates all residents will be treated with courtesy and respect in full recognition of their dignity and individuality by all they encounter, including, but not limited to employees. Once an allegation of abuse is reported to a staff supervisor or nurse on duty, the supervisor/nurse begins the investigation after assuring safety of resident. The alleged staff member or other person may have no further contact with residents, and may 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.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2023-03-08 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview and record review, the facility did not establish and maintain an infection control program designed to help prevent the development and transmission of disease and infection. This practice had the potential to affect all 52 residents residing in the facility. The facility did not conduct continuous infection surveillance including tracking and trending of illnesses, potential infectious agents, and monitoring of resident signs and symptoms of infection or potential infection. In addition, the facility did not maintain surveillance logs to help the facility recognize and track trends or patterns of infections and help prevent the spread of communicable diseases within the facility. Findings include: The facility's Surveillance for Infections policy, dated September 2017, contained the following information: The Infection Preventionist will conduct ongoing surveillance for Healthcare-Associated Infections (HAIs) and other epidemiologically significant infections that have substantial…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2023-03-08 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — widespreadImplement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interview and record review, the facility did not maintain an infection prevention and control program (IPCP) that included a functional antibiotic stewardship program. This had the potential to affect all 52 residents residing in the facility. Findings include: The facility's Antibiotic Stewardship-Review and Surveillance of Antibiotic Use and Outcomes document contained the following information: Antibiotic usage and outcome data will be collected and documented using a facility-approved antibiotic surveillance tracking form. The data will be used to guide decisions for improvement of individual resident antibiotic prescribing practices and facility-wide antibiotic stewardship. Policy Interpretation and Implementation: 1. As part of the facility's Antibiotic Stewardship Program, all clinical infections treated with antibiotics will undergo review by the Infection Preventionist, or designee. 2. The IP, or designee, will review antibiotic utilization as part of the antibiotic stewardship program and identify specific situations that are not consistent with the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2023-03-08 · tag F0882 — widespreadDesignate a qualified infection preventionist to be responsible for the infection prevent and control program in the nursing home.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interview and record review, the facility did not ensure the facility's Infection Preventionist (IP) completed specialized training in infection prevention and control. This had the potential to affect all 52 residents residing in the facility. IP-C started as the facility's designated IP on 8/22/22; however, IP-C did not complete specialized training for infection prevention and control until 2/20/23 and IP-C's employment at the facility ended on 2/27/23. Director of Nursing (DON)-B, Nursing Home Administrator (NHA)-A and Minimum Data Set Coordinator (MDS)-D became the facility's designated full-time IPs on 2/27/23; however, DON-B, NHA-A and MDS-D did not complete specialized training for infection prevention and control. Findings include: CMS (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services) Ref: QSO-22-19-NH last revised date: June 29, 2022 contains the following information: In 2016, CMS overhauled the Requirements for Participation for Long-Term Care (LTC) facilities (i.e., nursing homes), which was implemented in three phases: Phase 3 - November 28, 2019 .Phase 3…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2023-03-08 · tag F0886 — failed to test for COVID-19 as required — widespreadPerform COVID19 testing on residents and staff.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interview and record review, the facility did not conduct testing of residents and staff consistent with current standards of practice for COVID-19 testing. This had the potential to affect all 52 residents residing in the facility. The facility did not initiate an outbreak investigation, conduct COVID-19 testing or complete contract tracing when a new case of COVID-19 was identified among residents or staff. Findings include: CMS (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services) Memo QSO-20-38-NH, dated 8/26/2020 and revised 9/23/22, provides guidance for COVID-19 testing of nursing home staff and residents and contains the following information: To enhance efforts to keep COVID-19 from entering and spreading through nursing homes, facilities are required to test residents and staff based on parameters and a frequency set forth by the HHS (Health and Human Services) Secretary .2. An outbreak investigation is initiated when a single new case of COVID-19 occurs among residents or staff to determine if others have been exposed .In an outbreak investigation, rapid…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-03-08 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure the resident environment remained free of accident hazards for 1 Resident (R) (R26) of 13 sampled residents reviewed for safety. R26 did not have access to a call light when R26's door was closed and R26 was calling out for help. Findings include: R26 was admitted with diagnoses to include Alzheimer's disease with late onset, asthma, dementia in other diseases classified elsewhere, unspecified severity, with other behavioral disturbance, major depressive disorder recurrent, anxiety disorder, overactive bladder, and weakness. On 3/7/23 at 8:53 AM, Surveyor walked past R26's room and noted the door was closed all the way. Surveyor continuously observed R26's door from across the hall beginning on 3/7/23 at 8:53 AM. R26's call light was not activated. Staff were observed in the hall, but none at the same time as R26 was yelling. Surveyor noted staff did not check on R26 until 9:59 AM. Surveyor noted the following: On 3/7/23 at 8:56 AM, R26 yelled, Can somebody open the door please! On 3/7/23 at 8:57…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-03-08 · tag F0887 — isolatedEducate residents and staff on COVID-19 vaccination, offer the COVID-19 vaccine to eligible residents and staff after education, and properly document each resident and staff member's vaccination status.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure a resident or resident's representative was provided education regarding the risks versus benefits of COVID-19 immunization and did not obtain consent or refusal for COVID-19 immunization for 1 Resident (R) (R29) of 5 residents reviewed for immunizations. R29's medical record did not contain documentation to indicate R29 or R29's representative was provided education by the facility regarding COVID-19 immunization and offered the opportunity to receive or decline COVID-19 immunization. Findings include:: The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Quality, Safety & Oversight Group (QSO) Memo (Ref: QSO-21-19-NH) released on May 11, 2021, addresses the Interim Final Rule related to COVID-19 Vaccine Immunization Requirements for Residents and Staff, which includes requirements for educating residents or resident representatives and staff regarding the benefits and potential side effects associated with the COVID-19 vaccine, and offering the vaccine. Additionally, the facility must maintain appropriate…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · C2024-03-12 · tag F0732 — widespreadPost nurse staffing information every day.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and staff interview, the facility did not ensure the nurse staffing was posted daily and did not ensure the required information was on the posting. This practice had the potential to affect all 50 residents residing in the facility. During entrance to the facility on 3/10/24, Surveyor noted the nurse staff posting was dated 3/8/24. The facility did not consistently post the nurse staffing prior to the start of the shift and did not include the required information on the posting. Findings include: The Division of Quality Assurance (DQA) memo 12-020 Titled Clarification Concerning Posting Requirements for Nurse Staffing indicates: Required Staffing Information .Nursing homes must post information about the number of staff directly responsible for resident care on each shift. This information must be posted in a prominent place, readily accessible to residents and visitors at the start of each shift .The information that is posted must include the following .1. Facility name. 2. The current date. 3. The total number of staff directly responsible for resident care…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
$93,034 in federal fines across 18 penalties.
- $4,938 — penalty dated 2024-02-20
- $4,938 — penalty dated 2024-02-12
- $14,814 — penalty dated 2024-01-22
- $4,938 — penalty dated 2024-01-08
- $4,587 — penalty dated 2024-01-02
- $13,762 — penalty dated 2023-12-11
- $4,587 — penalty dated 2023-11-20
- $4,587 — penalty dated 2023-11-13
- $4,587 — penalty dated 2023-11-06
- $4,587 — penalty dated 2023-10-30
- $4,545 — penalty dated 2023-10-23
- $4,235 — penalty dated 2023-10-17
- $3,882 — penalty dated 2023-10-10
- $3,529 — penalty dated 2023-10-02
- $3,176 — penalty dated 2023-09-25
- $2,797 — penalty dated 2023-09-18
- $2,447 — penalty dated 2023-09-11
- $2,098 — penalty dated 2023-09-05
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.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| KOHN, DAN-A | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 06/15/2022 |
| CUNNINGHAM, LOREN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 06/13/2016 |
| EVERETT, CHARLENE | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 06/13/2022 |
| JONES, JEFFREY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 06/10/2019 |
| MOTT, PATRICIA | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 06/13/2016 |
| OLSEN, DENISE | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 06/13/2016 |
| PROULX, RICHARD | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 08/06/2011 |
| TEWS, ELLEN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 06/13/2016 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 10 rows in the source record cover these 8 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.
This home reported $88 paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in WI
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 Wisconsin Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 525559. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-05-07, 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.