Health Center At Franklin Park
Inspection history, citations, penalties and survey trends for this long-term care facility in Denver, Colorado.
- Location
- 1535 Park Ave, Denver, Colorado 80218
- CMS Provider Number
- 065213
- Inspections on file
- 27
- Latest survey
- March 26, 2026
- Citations (last 12 mo.)
- 14
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Health Center At Franklin Park during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
Failure to Provide Personalized and Consistent Activities: A resident with severe dementia and a BIMS score of 0 was repeatedly observed sitting idle near the nurses’ station while other residents participated in activities, and staff did not consistently invite or engage him in preferred sensory, music, walking, or one-to-one activities. In the secured dementia unit, scheduled group activities did not occur, residents were left without organized leisure options, and a resident stated there were no activities and he wanted to go outside.
Activities Program Not Directed by a Qualified Professional: Surveyors found the facility had an AD, but the NHA could not provide proof that the AD met qualification requirements or that an activities consultant provided oversight. The AD said this was her first activities position, she had not started the required course, and she was responsible for planning the resident activities calendar. Record review showed the AD completed activities records for a resident.
Unlabeled Medications Found in Medication Carts: Multiple medications and biologicals in two medication carts were stored in labeled boxes, but the individual inhalers, eye drops, artificial saliva spray, morphine oral solution, and insulin vial were not labeled with the resident's name or the date opened. RN and LPN staff stated medications should be labeled inside their boxes because the box could be damaged or the medication could become separated, and an unlabeled medication could lead to a medication error.
Crash carts were not maintained in safe operating condition. Staff found missing items on the first, second, and third floor carts, including a stethoscope, crash cart log, oxygen tank key, backboard, and a medical grade extension power cord. The second floor cart also contained expired suction tubing and a Yankauer tip. RN and DON interviews showed staff were unclear about generator-connected outlets and that the carts were expected to be checked nightly for required supplies and function.
A resident with dementia and bipolar disorder was given olanzapine, but the pharmacist and physician recommended a GDR without documentation that the resident’s representative was informed before the change was implemented. Another resident with Alzheimer’s disease, depression, insomnia, and PTSD had repeated agitation and exit-seeking while receiving multiple psychotropic medications, but the IDT review of sertraline was not clearly documented and the care plan lacked resident-specific non-pharmacological interventions or clear behavior monitoring details.
A facility failed to maintain ROM and body alignment for two residents. One resident with dementia, schizophrenia, and bilateral hand contractures was observed with both hands contracted and no splints in place, while the record lacked documentation of passive ROM being provided despite OT recommending it. Another resident with severe cognitive impairment and dementia was repeatedly observed in a recliner with the head tilted to one side without a pillow or other support, even though the care plan called for supportive positioning to maintain joint alignment.
Failure to Provide Personalized and Consistent Activities
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide activities designed to support residents’ physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for a resident with severe cognitive impairment and dementia-related diagnoses. The resident had diagnoses including dementia with agitation, frontotemporal neurocognitive disorder, and a history of falling, and the MDS showed a BIMS score of 0 with substantial assistance needed for eating, walking, bathing, and dressing. The activity care plan documented that the resident could socialize when given enough time to respond, could passively participate in activities, and needed assistance to and from group activities, with interventions to invite, encourage, remind, and escort him to activities consistent with his interests. Observations showed the resident repeatedly sitting in a recliner near the nurses’ station while other residents participated in activities in nearby common areas, but staff did not engage him or offer him activities. On multiple occasions, he was observed napping or sitting idle while staff passed by, and he was not offered participation in group activities such as television viewing, balloon play, or an outing for ice cream. During one continuous observation, staff members were seen moving other residents outside for ice cream while the resident remained in the recliner without interaction. The resident’s room was also observed and did not contain the spiritual comfort objects identified in the care plan. The resident’s activity attendance record showed he had not attended any activities except once, and there were no refusals documented. Staff interviews indicated that activities appropriate for him included sensory items, music, movies, exercise, aromatherapy, conversation, and walking, and that he should be approached at eye level and invited to join activities. Staff also stated that one-to-one visits and walking outside were provided weekly, but the observations documented that staff did not consistently offer or provide those interactions during the survey period. The facility also failed to ensure a meaningful activities program was consistently provided to residents in the secured dementia care unit. A resident in that unit stated there were no activities and that he wanted to go outside, and he did not know when activities were scheduled. Surveyors observed scheduled activities on the calendar, including events such as Celebrate Anything Day and House of [NAME], but no staff gathered residents for those events and the activities did not occur. Residents were observed sitting idle in the TV room and common area with no leisure materials available on the tables and no organized group activities offered during the observation periods. Resident council minutes showed residents had requested more one-on-one visits, games, weekend activity help, and more assistance for bingo and group activities, yet the observations showed those activities were not consistently provided on the secured unit.
Activities Program Not Directed by a Qualified Professional
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that the activities program was directed by a qualified professional. Surveyors found that the facility had an activities director, but the nursing home administrator was unable to provide documentation that the activities director had been enrolled in or had completed the required courses to be considered qualified. The administrator also could not provide documentation that the facility had employed an activities consultant to provide oversight to the activities department. Record review showed that the activities director completed the activities records for Resident #19. During interview, the activities director said she started working at the facility in September 2025, had never worked in a nursing facility before, knew she had to take a course to become a qualified activities director, but had not started it yet. She also said she did not have an activities consultant to help her and that she was responsible for planning the activities calendar for the facility's residents. The nursing home administrator stated that the activities director did not meet the requirements for the position and said she believed the facility met the requirements as long as the director was enrolled in a course.
Unlabeled Medications Found in Medication Carts
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure drugs and biologicals were stored, secured, and labeled in accordance with accepted professional standards in two of three medication carts. During observation of medication cart #2 on the second floor, multiple resident medications were found inside appropriately labeled medication boxes, but the individual inhalers, eye drops, and artificial saliva spray inside the boxes were not labeled with the resident's name or the date the medications were opened. The items included umeclidinium-bromide inhaler for one resident, two bottles of polyethylene glycol-propylene glycol eye drops for two residents, a Biotene dry mouth moisturizing spray for one resident, and an umeclidinium-vilanterol inhaler for another resident. During observation of medication cart #1 on the first floor, a bottle of morphine sulfate oral solution and a vial of insulin lispro injection solution were also found inside appropriately labeled medication boxes without the resident's name or the date the medications were opened. Staff interviewed during the survey stated that medications should be labeled inside their boxes because the box could be damaged or the medication could become separated from the box, and that an unlabeled medication could potentially cause a medication error because staff would not know who the medication belonged to.
Crash carts were missing required equipment and contained expired supplies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain three of five emergency crash carts in safe operating condition. During observations, staff found missing equipment on multiple carts, including a stethoscope, crash cart check-off log, oxygen tank key, backboard, and medical grade extension power cord. One crash cart also had checklists dated July 2023, and staff identified that the carts were located in the dining rooms on the first, second, and third floors. On the first floor crash cart, the stethoscope and crash cart check-off log were not present during the initial observation, and the oxygen tank key was missing. On the second floor crash cart, the stethoscope, backboard, and medical grade extension power cord were not present during the initial observation. On the third floor crash cart, the backboard was not present during the initial observation. When the carts were rechecked the next day, some missing items had been returned to the first, second, and third floor carts, but the medical grade extension power cord was still absent from the second floor cart. Expired supplies were also found in the second floor crash cart, including two 20-inch non-conductive connection tubes with expiration dates of 5/1/22 and 6/1/22, and a Yankauer suction tip with an expiration date of 9/5/22. RN #1 stated that night nurses were responsible for completing the crash cart log and ensuring required supplies were present, and she said the nurse should attempt to turn on the suction machine to confirm it worked properly. RN #1 and the DON both stated they did not know which electrical outlets were connected to the emergency backup generator. The DON also stated that the carts needed to be checked nightly for function, missing equipment, and expired supplies, and that she would not expect to see expired equipment if the carts were audited consistently.
Psychotropic Medication Review and Behavior Care Planning Deficiencies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure two residents were free from unnecessary psychotropic medication use and related monitoring deficiencies. One resident with dementia and bipolar disorder was receiving olanzapine (Zyprexa) 10 mg in the evening. The consultant pharmacist recommended a gradual dose reduction from 10 mg to 7.5 mg, and the physician agreed, documenting that staff should confirm the reduction with the resident’s representative before implementation. The physician later repeated that the representative should be contacted, but the resident’s representative stated the dose reduction was never discussed with her during the care conference, and there was no documentation in the EMR showing that the representative was informed before the medication was later decreased. A second resident with Alzheimer’s disease, dementia with mood disturbance, depression, insomnia, and PTSD was prescribed multiple psychoactive medications, including sertraline, trazodone, risperidone, and quetiapine, with orders to monitor for behaviors and medication reactions. The record showed repeated episodes of agitation, exit-seeking, yelling, calling 911, attempting to leave, and difficulty being redirected. Although social services notes stated the resident’s mood, psychosocial well-being, and psychoactive medication were reviewed by the physician, DON, and social services, the notes did not document what was reviewed or what decisions were made. The record also did not show that the interdisciplinary team reviewed the continued use of sertraline to determine whether it remained justified or whether a gradual dose reduction was indicated. The resident’s care plan did not include resident-specific non-pharmacological interventions for his behaviors. While the care plan addressed wandering, cognition, and mood in general terms, the EMR lacked documentation of specific interventions offered when behaviors occurred, what behaviors were being monitored, and what approaches were identified to help him when he became agitated. Staff interviews described de-escalation methods such as talking about tomorrow, checkers, ice cream, coffee, and redirection, but these approaches were not documented in the care plan or behavior monitoring records.
Failure to Maintain ROM and Proper Body Alignment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure services and assistance were provided to maintain range of motion and body alignment for two residents. One resident had bilateral hand contractures, and the record showed a history of impaired mobility, dementia, schizophrenia, depression, delusional disorders, and catatonic disorder. The resident was dependent on others for oral hygiene, toileting, showering, and upper and lower dressing, and the MDS showed no PT or OT services during the look-back period. The resident’s representative reported that the hand contractures began in November 2025 and that he had asked the facility about using a brace or towel between the hands to prevent worsening, but was told the resident could not use those items because staff were concerned she might swallow them. When the resident was observed, both hands were contracted, with the fingers of one hand nearly touching the palm and the fingers of the other hand touching the palm. The resident was not wearing hand splints. The pain care plan identified pain related to global decline in function, impaired mobility, contractures, and osteoarthritis, but it did not indicate passive ROM as an intervention for the contracted hands. The Kardex and March 2026 CPO also did not indicate passive ROM for the hands. OT discharge documentation recommended passive ROM for the upper and lower extremities, but there was no documentation in the EMR that passive ROM was offered or provided from the OT discharge through the survey date. A second resident with severe cognitive impairment, a BIMS score of zero, and diagnoses including dementia with agitation, frontotemporal neurocognitive disorder, and a history of falling was repeatedly observed sitting in a recliner with the head and neck tilted to the left without a pillow or cushion for support. During multiple observations over two days, staff members were present at the nurses’ station or nearby, but did not reposition the resident’s neck or provide supportive devices. The care plan for pressure ulcer prevention called for proper body positioning with supportive pillows, cushions, and positioning devices to reduce pressure points and maintain joint alignment. Staff interviews confirmed that the resident was supposed to have head support in the recliner, that a rolled towel had been tried at times, and that restorative services had included ambulation and ROM exercises, but the observed positioning support was not consistently provided during the survey observations.
Latest citations in Colorado
A resident with severe dementia, hallucinations, delusions, and chronic pain, who was independent with mobility and at risk for wandering, was struck in the face by another cognitively impaired resident known to exhibit verbal and physical aggression and to be highly protective of her room. An RN heard a commotion, saw the victim outside the aggressor’s room, and attempted to intervene but witnessed the aggressor hit the victim before reaching them, resulting in a lip laceration and bruise. The aggressor’s care plan noted use of a doorway stop sign or closed door and the need to redirect others away from her room, but she often refused these measures. At the time of the incident, only one CNA and one nurse were on the memory care unit due to an unfilled CNA call-in, and staff reported it was difficult to manage when two CNAs were not present. The facility investigation substantiated the event as abuse and identified that both residents may have had increased pain contributing to agitation before the altercation.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment and multiple chronic conditions intentionally slid from a wheelchair to sit on the floor and refused assistance to return to the chair. An LPN directed two CNAs to place a blanket under the resident and drag the resident across the floor, onto an elevator, and to another floor, rather than allowing the resident to remain seated on the floor as requested. The resident later reported trying to resist and stated dislike of the experience. Documentation by the LPN omitted how the resident was actually moved between floors, despite care plan goals for dignity and autonomy and a facility policy requiring residents be treated with dignity and respect and that their choices and preferences be honored.
Surveyors found that staff repeatedly failed to follow hand hygiene and Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) requirements. CNAs and an LPN provided direct care, including incontinence care, use of a mechanical lift sling, and gastric tube feeding, without performing hand hygiene before or after care and without using required gowns for residents on EBP. One CNA handled a soiled lift sling, touched his hair and face, used a touchscreen to document care, and then assisted another resident without cleaning his hands. Another CNA entered an EBP room wearing only gloves, not a gown, and did not perform hand hygiene after removing gloves. An LPN handled a feeding tube and provided care to residents on EBP without hand hygiene or gown use. A resident’s representative reported seeing staff work with a feeding tube without gloves or a gown, while staff interviews and facility policy described correct practices that were not followed in practice.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment and multiple serious diagnoses had a physician-appointed health care proxy who reported that the facility did not inform her when the resident’s condition changed or when an antibiotic was started, and that her calls were not returned for days. Another representative for the same resident stated that calls went to a general voicemail and were rarely or very slowly returned. Grievance records documented repeated concerns about delayed communication, lack of notification about new medications, and difficulty reaching staff. Other residents’ representatives similarly reported that calls to check on residents or report suspected verbal abuse went to voicemail and were returned late or not at all, while staff acknowledged that calls often went to voicemail and that several calls from representatives were missed or delayed.
The facility failed to investigate an allegation of verbal abuse and threats between two cognitively impaired roommates after a family member, who was on the phone with one resident, reported hearing the other resident yelling loudly and making threats. The resident’s representative could not reach staff by phone and contacted EMS, which responded to the facility, yet no investigation or documentation of the altercation, alleged threats, or EMS involvement was found in either resident’s record. Staff acknowledged loud yelling and arguing and initiated a room change, but the RN did not fully inform the DON, the SSD—who was not present—dismissed the event as a simple argument, and the NHA did not treat or report it as abuse, contrary to facility policies requiring identification, investigation, and reporting of possible verbal or mental abuse by other residents.
Unsafe food handling and kitchen sanitation practices were observed in the dining room and main kitchen. Staff handled ready-to-eat foods with bare hands, failed to wash hands between tasks and after bathroom use, and touched food, dishes, and meal tickets while plating and serving meals. The facility also kept moldy croissants in dry storage, used a pencil to prop up a hood drip pan, and allowed a dietary aide with artificial nails and multiple bracelets to serve residents.
The facility failed to maintain and document safe food temperatures during meal service, resulting in cold foods being held and served within the temperature danger zone and incomplete temperature logs on multiple days. During a lunch service observation, various forms of chicken salad were held at 45–55°F, yet plates were assembled and sent out, and a resident reported that meals delivered to the room were always cold and often not eaten. Staff interviews showed inconsistent understanding of required hot and cold holding temperatures and confirmed that temperature logs were sometimes not completed as required.
Failure to Honor Residents’ Choice of Attending Physician: Three cognitively intact residents said they were not allowed to choose their own attending physician and were required to see the facility MD instead. EMR and admission agreement review showed no documentation that they were offered a choice of physician, despite one resident wanting to continue with a community PCP. The NHA stated residents could choose their attending physician, but also said the facility had only one physician available for residents to choose from.
Psychotropic Medication Documentation and PRN Behavior Monitoring Deficiencies Survey review found that several residents had psychotropic medications ordered without documented physician rationale, resident-specific target behaviors, or individualized non-pharmacological interventions. Generic behavior-monitoring orders were used instead of approaches tied to each resident’s history, interests, and identified behaviors, and one resident’s PRN antipsychotic was administered multiple times without documentation of attempted non-pharmacological interventions before use. The EMR also showed notes of stability or no unwanted behaviors for some residents, yet the records still lacked rationale supporting continued psychotropic treatment.
Failure to Address Suicidal Ideation and Individualized Psychosocial Needs: The facility did not adequately address suicidal statements, trauma-related needs, or individualized behavioral interventions for multiple residents. One resident with dementia, anxiety, and PTSD made a suicidal threat, but the record did not show ongoing safety monitoring or documented follow-up. Another resident with PTSD, depression, and a history of trauma and suicide attempts had ongoing depressive symptoms, but the care plan and orders did not reflect the PASRR-identified need for therapeutic support, psychiatric oversight, coping skills, or a safety plan. A third resident with autism and mood disturbance had inappropriate sexual behavior toward the DON, but the care plan was not updated with person-centered interventions specific to that behavior.
Failure to Prevent Resident-to-Resident Physical Abuse on Memory Care Unit
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to protect a resident from physical abuse by another resident. On the date of the incident, an RN heard a commotion in the hallway outside the alleged assailant’s room and observed that resident strike another resident, causing the victim’s lip to bleed. The RN had seen both residents near the medication cart a few minutes earlier without concern and attempted to intervene when she saw the victim standing outside the assailant’s room, but was unable to reach them before the strike occurred. The two residents were then separated, and frequent checks were initiated. The victim was a younger-than-65 resident with vascular dementia (severe, with agitation), Alzheimer’s disease, Lewy body disease, bipolar disorder, and chronic pain. Her MDS showed short- and long-term memory problems, hallucinations, delusions, and physical and verbal behaviors toward others, with moderately impaired cognition and impaired decision-making. She was independent with mobility and had a care plan for wandering and dementia that identified her as pleasantly confused and easily redirected, with interventions to identify wandering patterns, offer diversions, and assess for pain or toileting needs when agitated. Documentation on the day of the incident noted her involvement in a resident-to-resident altercation, a small laceration to the middle of her upper lip, and a small bruise below her lower lip. The assailant was an older resident with severe vascular dementia with agitation, memory deficit after intracranial hemorrhage, and recurrent depressive disorder. Her MDS documented short- and long-term memory problems, fluctuating disorganized thinking, and verbal behaviors directed toward others that could significantly intrude on others’ privacy or disrupt the environment. Her behavior/dementia care plan identified verbal aggression (yelling/screaming), physical aggression (hitting), refusal of care, withdrawal, tearfulness, and negative statements, and noted that she was protective of her room and became upset if others entered or tried to enter. The care plan included use of a velcro stop sign across her doorway or keeping her door closed, but also documented that she often declined having the door closed, requiring staff to redirect other residents away from her room. Staff statements indicated that at the time of the incident there was one CNA and one nurse on the memory care unit, that one CNA had called in and was not replaced, and that it was hard when there were not two CNAs on the unit. The facility’s investigation substantiated the incident as abuse and identified that both residents may have been experiencing increased pain leading up to the altercation, with pain, constipation, and urinary retention noted as contributing factors for the victim and hand contracture pain and refusal of interventions noted for the assailant.
Resident Dragged on Blanket Instead of Honoring Request to Sit on Floor
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves a failure to honor a resident’s right to dignity and self-determination when staff did not allow the resident to remain seated on the floor per his wishes and instead dragged him on a blanket between floors. Late at night, the resident, who lived on the second floor, was in his wheelchair on the first floor and intentionally slid out of his wheelchair to sit on the ground according to his own wishes. When staff offered assistance to help him back into his wheelchair, he refused. Despite this refusal, an LPN directed two CNAs to move the resident from the first floor back to the second floor. Following the resident’s refusal to get back into his wheelchair, the LPN instructed the CNAs to place a blanket underneath the resident so he could be dragged while lying on it. The CNAs and the LPN maneuvered the blanket under the resident by moving him from side to side. One CNA positioned herself behind the resident and placed her arms under his armpits, while the other CNA held the resident’s pants at his ankles. The LPN then pulled on the blanket with the resident on it. Together, the three staff members dragged the resident on the blanket across the floor and onto the elevator, transported him to the second floor, and then dragged him off the elevator onto the second floor hallway. Once on the second floor, the resident agreed to have two staff members assist him back into his wheelchair, and a two-person transfer was performed to lift him from the floor into the chair. The resident later reported that he remembered being pulled on the blanket, stated that he "tried to fight them like crazy," and said he did not like what had been done. The nursing progress note written by the LPN the following morning documented that the resident had remained on the first floor until late at night, refused to talk with staff, refused care, and declined snacks, fluids, and redirection, but the note did not document how he was actually relocated to the second floor. The resident’s records showed he had severe cognitive impairment with a BIMS score of 3/15, diagnoses including Parkinson’s disease, depression, unspecified intellectual disabilities, traumatic brain injury, seizures, and chronic kidney disease stage 3, and care plan goals that included being treated with dignity and autonomy. The facility’s dignity policy stated that residents are to be treated with dignity and respect at all times, that their choices and preferences are to be honored, and that demeaning practices are prohibited, which was not followed in this incident.
Failure to Follow Hand Hygiene and Enhanced Barrier Precautions
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to maintain an effective infection prevention and control program, specifically related to hand hygiene and adherence to Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) on all four units. The facility’s own policies require hand hygiene before and after direct patient care and the use of gowns and gloves during high-contact care activities for residents on EBP. CDC guidance cited in the report emphasizes that hand hygiene protects both healthcare personnel and patients, and that EBP requires targeted gown and glove use during high-contact resident care activities, particularly for residents with wounds, indwelling devices, or MDRO colonization or infection. Surveyors observed multiple instances where staff did not follow these requirements. An unidentified CNA exited a room of a resident on EBP without wearing a gown while providing care. On another occasion, a CNA exited a resident’s room carrying a soiled mechanical lift sling without gloves, failed to perform hand hygiene, touched his hair and face, used a touchscreen to document care, and then entered another resident’s room to answer a call light and assist with a request without performing hand hygiene before or after assisting that resident. Another CNA entered the room of a resident on EBP, donned only gloves without a gown, provided incontinence care, then left the room with soiled linens and trash properly disposed of, removed gloves, but did not perform hand hygiene before caring for another resident. Additional observations showed an LPN entering the room of a resident on EBP for gastric tube feeding, setting up and handling the feeding tube without performing hand hygiene beforehand and without wearing a gown. The same LPN later entered another EBP room, provided care, and left without performing hand hygiene. A resident’s representative reported seeing staff work with the resident’s feeding tube without gloves or a gown. In interviews, CNAs and nursing staff described correct hand hygiene and EBP practices, including washing hands for about 20 seconds and using gowns and gloves for residents on EBP, and the DON stated she expected staff to perform hand hygiene when entering and exiting rooms and to follow EBP procedures requiring gown and glove use. These stated practices conflicted with the observed failures in hand hygiene and EBP adherence documented by surveyors.
Failure to Notify Health Care Proxy and Return Calls Regarding Change in Condition
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to inform a resident’s physician-appointed health care proxy of changes in the resident’s condition and new treatments, and to return the proxy’s calls in a timely manner. Facility policy on Notification of Changes required informing the resident, consulting with the physician, and notifying the family member or legal representative when there was a change requiring such notification, and specified that when residents were incapable of making their own decisions, the representative would make necessary decisions. Resident #1 was under 65, admitted with diagnoses including paralysis and weakness following a stroke, respiratory failure, cognitive communication deficit, and encephalopathy, and was documented as severely cognitively impaired with a BIMS score of 0/15, indicating reliance on the health care proxy for decision-making. The health care proxy reported that the facility made it very difficult to contact the resident, stating that staff did not return calls for days and that she was not informed when the resident developed an infection and was started on an antibiotic until after the medication had already been initiated. She stated she had several questions about the medication and was not consulted on the medical decision prior to its start. Another representative reported that calls to the facility went to a general voicemail and that her messages were either not returned or took several days for a response. Grievance records showed repeated concerns from the resident’s representatives about delays in speaking with the resident, delays in return calls, and lack of notification about new medications and changes in condition. Additional interviews with other residents’ representatives supported a broader pattern of delayed or absent communication. One representative of another resident reported that his call to check on a newly admitted resident went to voicemail and was not returned for two days. Another resident’s representative and a secondary witness reported that when they attempted to report suspected verbal abuse, their calls to the facility and to the SSD went to voicemail and were never returned. Staff interviews confirmed that calls first went to the front desk and then to the nurses’ stations, that calls often went to voicemail when nurses were unable to answer, and that voicemail messages were expected to be returned within 24 hours. The NHA acknowledged that several calls from the resident’s representatives went to voicemail and that calls were often made during shift change when it was harder to reach the nurse on duty, but there was no documentation to support the claimed regular communication with the health care proxy.
Failure to Investigate Alleged Verbal Abuse Between Cognitively Impaired Roommates
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to investigate an allegation of verbal abuse and threats between two cognitively impaired residents after a family member reported overhearing the incident. Facility policy on abuse, neglect, exploitation, and misappropriation requires that all possible incidents of abuse, including verbal and mental abuse by other residents, be identified, investigated, and reported within required timeframes, with residents protected from further harm during investigations. The policy on identifying types of abuse specifies that yelling or hovering over a resident with intent to intimidate is an example of mental and verbal abuse. Despite these policies, the facility did not initiate or document an investigation into a reported verbal altercation that included alleged threats. One resident, under age 65, with dysphagia, left-sided hemiplegia, attention and concentration deficit, delusional disorder, and major depressive disorder, had moderate cognitive impairment and was dependent on staff for most ADLs. He reported that he and his roommate yelled back and forth at each other after the roommate told him to “shut the [expletive],” but he did not recall the specific words used and denied any physical contact. His guardian stated that he later reported being fearful of his roommate after the incident. Another representative, who was on the phone with him during the event, reported hearing the roommate yelling loudly and making threats toward him, then hearing a nurse enter to calm the situation. This representative attempted to call the facility to report the yelling and threatening behavior, was sent to voicemail without a return call, and subsequently contacted emergency services. The roommate, an older resident with dementia, cognitive communication deficit, depression, and insomnia, also had moderate cognitive impairment and required staff assistance for most ADLs. He did not recall the incident, and his representative only learned of it the following day and was told it involved yelling about loud phone use. A review of both residents’ medical records revealed no documentation of the verbal altercation, the alleged threats, or related concerns, and no investigation documents were produced when requested. Staff interviews confirmed there had been loud yelling and arguing, that EMS responded to the facility, and that a room change was initiated due to the incident, but the RN who responded did not report the EMS involvement to the DON. The SSD, who was not present during the incident, characterized it as just an argument and stated there were no threats, and the NHA stated the event was not reported as abuse because they believed no threats were made. No contemporaneous interviews with the residents were documented, and no inquiry was made by facility staff into why EMS had been called in relation to the altercation, resulting in a failure to investigate the allegation of verbal abuse as required by facility policy.
Unsafe Food Handling and Kitchen Sanitation Deficiencies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards in the main kitchen and dining areas. During meal service observations, staff repeatedly handled ready-to-eat foods with bare hands and did not perform hand hygiene when changing tasks, after touching dirty dishes, after using the bathroom, or before serving food. An LPN cut a resident’s patty melt and handed pieces to the resident with her bare hand without sanitizing her hands. A DA passed drinks by touching the rims of cups, and another DA tore a resident’s patty melt into smaller pieces with bare hands and handed food to the resident. During a later observation, kitchen staff continued to work without washing hands between tasks and while handling food, dishes, and meal tickets. A DA entered the kitchen from the dishroom and did not wash his hands before putting away snacks. A cook did not wash her hands after working at the sink, after touching dirty dishes, after exiting the bathroom in the kitchen, or before serving room trays. She was observed touching shrimp, corn bread, rice, squash, cheese, and frozen fries with bare hands while plating and preparing meals, and she also handled fryer baskets and food items without washing her hands. Another cook wiped her hands on her clothing, handled meal tickets, and touched ready-to-eat foods with bare hands while assembling plates and serving meals. The facility also failed to discard expired or spoiled food, maintain equipment in good repair, and prevent staff from wearing prohibited items while preparing or serving food. A plastic bag of croissants in dry storage contained bread-like food covered in dark green and black fuzz and remained on the bread rack on two separate observations. In the kitchen hood system above the grill, a half wooden pencil was being used to hold up the grease drip pan on two observations. In addition, a dietary aide taking meal orders, passing drinks, and serving meals had artificial nails approximately half an inch long and multiple fabric bracelets on her wrists while working with residents.
Failure to Maintain and Document Safe Food Temperatures During Meal Service
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in a sanitary manner by not maintaining appropriate food temperatures during meal service and by not consistently documenting food temperatures as required. During a continuous observation of lunch meal service, chicken salad, including soft and bite-sized and pureed versions, was found on the steam table at temperatures of 55°F and 45°F, which were within the documented temperature danger zone and below the required cold-holding standard. Despite these temperatures, plates with wedge chicken salad and a Hawaiian roll were assembled and placed on the meal cart for service. A resident reported that meals delivered to his room were always cold, leading him not to eat them and to attempt to obtain food from outside the facility. Review of the facility’s April 2026 food temperature logs showed multiple instances where temperatures were not documented for breakfast, lunch, and dinner services on numerous dates. Staff interviews revealed inconsistent understanding and application of proper holding temperatures, with the cook and dietary manager providing varying temperature thresholds that did not align with the facility policy or the Colorado Retail Food Establishment Rules and Regulations. The cook acknowledged that the wedge chicken salad should not have been served at 55°F and attributed difficulty maintaining proper temperatures to a hot room with inadequate ventilation, while the dietary manager stated that cooks sometimes forgot to complete the temperature logs.
Failure to Honor Residents’ Choice of Attending Physician
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure three cognitively intact residents were allowed to choose their own attending physician. Resident #15, Resident #28, and Resident #30 each stated during a group interview that they did not have a choice in who their physician could be while in the facility and that they had to see the facility’s MD. Resident #15 said she had a primary care physician in town that she wanted to continue seeing, but she was told she could not see that physician. Resident #28 and Resident #30 each said they were required to see the facility’s MD instead of choosing their own physician. Record review for each of the three residents, including the admission agreement and EMR, showed no documentation that they were provided a choice of attending physician. Resident #15 had diagnoses including COPD, cirrhosis of the liver, and osteoarthritis, and her MDS showed she was cognitively intact with a BIMS score of 15. Resident #28 had diagnoses including type 2 diabetes mellitus, asthma, osteoarthritis, and TIA/cerebral infarction, and was also cognitively intact with a BIMS score of 15. Resident #30 had diagnoses including type 2 diabetes mellitus, wedge compression fracture of T11-T12 and L3, and hypertension, and his MDS likewise showed a BIMS score of 15. The NHA stated residents were able to choose their attending physician when admitted, but also said the facility had one physician residents could choose from and was not aware that these residents wanted different physicians.
Psychotropic Medication Documentation and PRN Behavior Monitoring Deficiencies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure four residents were free from unnecessary psychotropic medication use and chemical restraint concerns. Survey review found that the facility did not document a physician’s rationale for the continued use of psychotropic medications for three residents, did not document resident-specific care approaches with medication-specific target behaviors and person-centered interventions for those residents, and did not ensure one resident’s PRN antipsychotic use had corresponding documentation of identified behaviors and non-pharmacological interventions. For one resident with PTSD, anxiety, and depression, the record showed buspirone, Valium, duloxetine, and Lexapro orders with behavior-monitoring language, but the orders did not identify resident-specific non-pharmacological interventions for specific behaviors. The resident’s PASRR described a history of self-harm, suicidal thoughts, mood swings, loss of interest, and low energy, and recommended therapeutic interventions, coping skills, psychiatric oversight, increased socialization, and activities such as puzzles, games, and painting. The EMR review did not show documented behaviors during the review period, and it did not show a physician rationale to justify continued psychotropic use. For another resident with schizoaffective disorder, dementia, anxiety, and depression, the care plan and orders listed generic interventions and behavior targets such as screaming, hallucinations, kicking, and yelling, but the resident-specific behaviors and interests identified in the PASRR, including hearing the devil inside her head and being soothed by prayer and rosary use, were not incorporated into the behavior-monitoring orders or care plan. The record also lacked documentation of non-pharmacological interventions used for the resident’s behaviors and lacked a physician rationale for continued psychotropic use despite notes stating the resident was stable and not experiencing unwanted behaviors. A third resident with vascular dementia, anxiety, and PTSD had orders for Abilify, mirtazapine, sertraline, clonazepam, and behavior monitoring tied to verbal aggression, exit seeking, tearfulness, and hitting staff, but the orders remained generic and did not reflect the resident’s individualized approaches such as listening to 80’s rock music or watching a favorite program when crying or confused. The EMR again did not show a physician rationale for continued psychotropic use despite notes indicating pleasant mood and no unwanted behaviors. For the resident who died during the stay and had dementia and depression, the record showed Lexapro, Seroquel, and PRN injectable haloperidol ordered for behaviors such as swinging at staff and agitation. The PRN haloperidol order did not list a diagnosed specific condition, only behaviors, and the order for non-pharmacological interventions was not initiated until after the resident had already been receiving psychotropic medications. MAR and order administration notes showed multiple PRN haloperidol administrations, but several entries lacked documentation of attempted non-pharmacological interventions before the medication was given, and one note only documented encouragement to sit down without identifying the other ordered interventions or their effectiveness.
Failure to Address Suicidal Ideation and Individualized Psychosocial Needs
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that residents with mental disorders, psychosocial adjustment difficulties, and trauma histories received appropriate treatment and services to support their mental and psychosocial well-being. For one resident with vascular dementia, anxiety, and PTSD, the record showed repeated depression screens indicating little interest, depressed mood, poor appetite, sleep problems, low energy, and feelings of worthlessness, along with notes describing chronic behaviors potentially causing harm, tearfulness, withdrawal, and anxiety. A behavior note documented that the resident stated she was going to kill herself, but the record did not show documented interventions to keep her safe afterward or ongoing monitoring for suicidal ideation. A second resident with PTSD, anxiety, depression, and a documented history of trauma, self-harm, suicidal thoughts, and numerous suicide attempts had a PASRR evaluation identifying the need for therapeutic interventions, psychiatric oversight, coping skills development, and a safety plan. The resident told staff she had previously seen a therapist at the facility, but that therapy had stopped and no new arrangements had been made. She also reported that staff had not asked about her PTSD triggers or what interventions would help her. The record showed depression screens with ongoing depressive symptoms, but no follow-up documentation after those screenings, and the care plan and physician orders did not reflect the resident’s suicidal history or the specialized services identified in the PASRR. The facility also failed to provide individualized care approaches for a resident with autistic disorder, dementia with mood disturbance, anxiety disorder, major depressive disorder, and cognitive communication deficit. The resident had a history of inappropriate sexual behaviors and was documented as having sexually inappropriate contact with the DON when he squeezed her breast during a dining activity. Although the resident was placed on 15-minute behavior monitoring for 24 hours, the care plan was not revised to reflect a person-centered intervention specific to that sexual behavior. Staff interviews showed that interventions were inconsistently understood and that the nursing staff did not know what person-centered interventions were in place for the resident’s behaviors.
Trusted data from CMS and state health departments
Every citation, penalty and Plan of Correction is sourced from public CMS records (latest release June 24, 2026) and official state health department websites — never guesswork.
Trusted by long-term care providers and associations.
