Darcy Hall Of Life Care
Inspection history, citations, penalties and survey trends for this long-term care facility in West Palm Beach, Florida.
- Location
- 2170 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd, West Palm Beach, Florida 33409
- CMS Provider Number
- 105516
- Inspections on file
- 38
- Latest survey
- March 18, 2026
- Citations (last 12 mo.)
- 5 (2 serious)
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Darcy Hall Of Life Care during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
The facility failed to implement an effective infection prevention and control program for a scabies outbreak, including missing documentation that a resident actually received ordered ivermectin and that a dermatology consult for a persistent rash occurred. Multiple residents treated with permethrin cream and ivermectin were not consistently placed on contact precautions as required by facility policy, with some having no precautions and others experiencing delays despite ongoing treatment. The infection surveillance line listing did not include several residents with itchy rashes who were reported to the State Agency, undermining tracking and trending of the outbreak. Environmental services records showed only routine and terminal cleaning without documented bagging of linens or personal items or mattress vacuuming as required by the scabies policy. Although the ICP reported that staff were educated on scabies during the outbreak, there was no documentation of such training during the outbreak period, only records of education sessions held later.
A resident with dementia, severe cognitive impairment, incontinence, weight loss, and existing stage 3 pressure ulcers to the left buttock and sacrum was care planned for skin integrity and ordered daily, then twice-daily, wound care with as-needed dressing changes. Documentation showed that ordered wound care was missed on at least two occasions without explanation, while the left buttock wound resolved but the sacral wound deteriorated from stage 3 to stage 4. Subsequent testing showed the sacral wound was infected with multiple bacteria and associated with osteomyelitis.
A resident with cognitive impairment and multiple medical conditions, identified as an elopement risk and residing in a secured unit, was able to exit the facility undetected through the main entrance while the receptionist was distracted by visitors. The facility's entrance system allowed visitors to enter without a code, and staff did not notice the resident leaving. The resident was later found by law enforcement with minor injuries after missing several medication doses. The deficiency resulted from inadequate supervision and ineffective security measures.
A resident with moderate to severe cognitive impairment and multiple medical conditions, identified as an elopement risk and residing in a secured unit, was able to exit the facility undetected while staff were distracted by visitors. The facility's unsecured hallways and entrance procedures allowed the resident to leave without staff noticing, despite care planning and risk assessments indicating the need for supervision. The resident was later found by law enforcement with minor injuries after missing several medication doses.
A resident with moderate cognitive impairment and physical limitations expressed a preference for showers over bed baths, but received only one shower in 30 days despite being scheduled for showers twice a week. Staff interviews revealed a lack of awareness of the resident's shower schedule, leading to the resident's preferences not being honored.
A facility failed to accurately document a resident's Advance Directive care plan, resulting in a discrepancy between the care plan and the resident's actual resuscitation preferences. The resident, with severe cognitive impairment and receiving hospice services, was incorrectly documented as a full code despite having a DNR order. The error was confirmed by the Central Unit Manager.
A resident with multiple diagnoses, including dementia, was not provided with a communication board as per her care plan, leading to communication challenges. The resident attempted to convey her needs using non-verbal cues, which were misunderstood by CNAs, highlighting the deficiency in maintaining her communication abilities.
The facility failed to address a resident's skin condition timely, did not administer blood pressure medications as ordered for two residents, and neglected to follow physician orders for another resident's positioning to prevent contractures. Staff were unaware of medication parameters and positioning requirements, leading to deficiencies in care.
The facility failed to properly discard and document the administration of controlled medications for several residents. A resident had multiple packs of Lorazepam without corresponding orders, while another had discontinued medication still present. Additionally, two residents had discrepancies between the Controlled Medication Utilization Record and the MAR, indicating a lack of proper documentation. Staff and the DON acknowledged these issues.
A facility failed to secure a medication cart on the D Unit and a treatment cart on the West Unit, both found unlocked and unattended. The medication cart contained drugs for 22 residents and was accessible to independently ambulatory residents. The treatment cart, located in a memory care unit, held wound care supplies and was accessible to cognitively impaired residents. Staff acknowledged the issues upon notification.
The facility failed to provide pureed meals in accordance with dietary orders for three residents with dysphagia. Observations revealed that meals contained lumps and strands, contrary to the required smooth texture. The Food Service Director acknowledged these inconsistencies, which did not meet the facility's policy for pureed diets.
A resident with specific dietary dislikes was repeatedly served meals containing those items, leading to inadequate nutritional intake. Despite documented preferences and increased nutritional needs due to a medical condition, the facility failed to provide alternative meal options, resulting in significant weight loss.
The facility failed to maintain food safety and sanitation standards, with issues including a personal backpack on dishware, unsanitary conditions in the dry storage room, and improper labeling and storage of nutritional drinks in the nourishment room. These deficiencies were acknowledged by the FSD and DON.
Failure to Implement Effective Scabies Infection Prevention and Control Measures
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to maintain an effective infection prevention and control program during a scabies outbreak. One resident had weekly skin assessments documenting a rash over several months, and physician orders were written for ivermectin on two specific dates to treat scabies. A nursing progress note indicated the pharmacy was contacted and would send the medication, but the medical record contained no documentation that the ivermectin was ever administered. The same resident was to be added to a dermatology consult list and later had a physician order for a dermatology consultation for a rash on the back and upper arms, yet there was no evidence in the record that the dermatology consultation occurred. During a side‑by‑side record review, the Infection Control Preventionist (ICP) agreed with these findings. The facility also failed to implement timely and consistent contact precautions for multiple residents treated for scabies, contrary to its policy requiring contact precautions prior to and during treatment. One resident received multiple courses of permethrin cream and ivermectin over several months; contact precautions were documented only for an initial period and then were absent for an extended interval despite ongoing treatment. Another resident received permethrin cream and ivermectin with no documented contact precautions at any time during treatment. A third resident, who reported having a rash that began at the facility and being treated on and off for a few months, had intermittent contact precautions that were delayed several days after initiation of treatment on more than one occasion. The ICP stated that contact precautions should begin with suspicion or treatment of scabies and noted that the onsite dermatologist sometimes ordered permethrin directly from the pharmacy without prior notification to the ICP. The infection surveillance and environmental control components of the program were also deficient. The facility reported a rash/scabies outbreak to the State Agency and maintained a log of residents with itchy rashes, but the corresponding Infection Surveillance Line Listing Report omitted most of those residents, including several identified in October and two in November, even though the ICP acknowledged the log was used to track and trend infections. Environmental services policies required bagging linens, towels, washcloths, lift slings, and clothing from the preceding three days, specific laundering or maintenance procedures, and thorough vacuuming of mattresses for residents treated for scabies. However, documentation provided for the affected unit during the outbreak showed only routine cleaning schedules and terminal cleaning checklists that lacked room numbers and did not reference bagging of linens or personal items or mattress vacuuming, and the Director of Environmental Services agreed with these findings. Additionally, although the ICP stated that staff education on scabies was ongoing and had been provided during the outbreak, the only documented trainings related to scabies were dated in December and January, with no evidence of staff education in October or November during the period of the outbreak.
Failure to Consistently Provide Ordered Pressure Ulcer Care Resulting in Wound Deterioration
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to provide ordered pressure ulcer care and promote healing of a facility-acquired sacral pressure ulcer for one resident with severe cognitive impairment, dementia, total dependence for ADLs, weight loss, two stage 3 pressure ulcers, and continuous bowel and bladder incontinence. The resident was care planned as at risk for skin breakdown with interventions including frequent turning and repositioning, keeping the skin clean and dry after each incontinent episode, and use of a low air loss mattress. The resident was also care planned for left buttock and sacral pressure ulcers with interventions to administer treatments as ordered and provide frequent incontinent care. Wounds to the left buttock and sacrum were first identified by a CNA and documented as stage 3 pressure ulcers by wound care on 01/13/26. Physician orders dated 01/15/26 required daily wound care and as-needed dressing changes if soiled, wet, or dislodged, but the MAR showed wound care was not completed on 01/16/26 with no documented reason. On 01/21/26, wound care documentation showed the left buttock wound had resolved while the sacral wound had deteriorated, and wound care orders were increased to twice daily. The MAR then showed that the ordered evening wound care on 01/22/26 was not done, again without explanation. Subsequent wound care notes documented that the sacral wound further deteriorated to a stage 4 pressure ulcer, with a wound culture later positive for three different bacteria and an x-ray confirming osteomyelitis. The wound care nurse confirmed that the left buttock wound resolved but the sacral wound deteriorated after initially being identified as a stage 3 pressure ulcer.
Failure to Prevent Resident Elopement Due to Inadequate Supervision and Security
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency occurred when the facility failed to protect a resident from neglect by not providing necessary supervision to prevent elopement. The resident, who had a history of Parkinson's Disease, cognitive impairment, and other significant medical conditions, was identified as being at risk for elopement and resided in a secured unit. Despite this, the resident was able to exit the facility undetected through the main entrance while the receptionist was distracted by visitors. The main entrance required manual unlocking after a buzzer was engaged, and the receptionist, responsible for monitoring the entrance camera, did not notice the resident leaving. There were no additional staff present at the entrance at the time of the incident. The resident's care plan and medical orders clearly indicated an elopement risk, and she was supposed to be provided with safe wandering interventions and supervision. On the day of the incident, the resident was last seen in the dining room and then was not found during medication pass and dinner. Staff initiated a search after realizing the resident was missing, but by that time, the resident had already left the building. The facility's layout allowed access from the secured unit to the main lobby and entrance through unsecured hallways, and the entrance system allowed visitors to enter without a code, though a code was required to exit. This system was in place at the time of the incident, and staff interviews confirmed that visitors could access the secured unit without a code, potentially allowing residents to leave unnoticed. The resident was found by law enforcement several hours later, approximately two miles from the facility, with minor injuries such as abrasions and bruising. She missed several doses of her prescribed medications during the period she was missing. Interviews with staff indicated that the resident had not previously exhibited exit-seeking behaviors and that staff were not aware of any immediate risk on the day of the incident. The failure to provide adequate supervision and effective security measures directly led to the resident's elopement and the resulting deficiency.
Removal Plan
- 100% headcount of residents was completed to ensure no other residents were missing. All other residents were accounted for.
- A whole house search of the facility was completed.
- The executive director was notified by the weekend supervisor who in turn notified facility managers to report to work to assist in the search. Regional and divisional staff were also notified and reported to the facility to assist in the search. The medical director and primary physician were notified.
- An external search of the community was initiated.
- Executive Director notified the local Police Department who assisted in the search.
- Upon return, the resident was placed on one-to-one supervision on the secured unit. (1:1 monitoring ordered).
- All facility exit door alarms and screamer devices were inspected by the Maintenance Director.
- Keypad code to secure unit was changed by the Maintenance Director.
- Immediate education on abuse neglect and exploitation and risk of elopement initiated.
- 3-11 shift sign-in sheet reviewed. 11-7 signage sheet reviewed. No concerns.
- The elopement risk assessments of all residents were reviewed for accuracy.
- An elopement drill was performed for the 11-7 shift.
- The resident was assessed by the nurse upon return and by the physician. Skin assessment done.
- An elopement drill was performed for the 7-3 shift.
- The care plans and kardexes of residents at risk for elopement were reviewed for accuracy.
- Visitor lanyards were ordered for identification of visitors/vendors to differentiate visitors from residents. The lanyards were put into use immediately.
- Keypad order to replace push button for entry to units. Keypad was installed.
- Elopement books were reviewed for accuracy.
- An ad hoc QAPI was performed by the facility IDT and reviewed by the Medical Director.
- The Executive Director initiated education related to abuse/neglect reporting.
- The Assistant Executive Director notified the Department of Children and Families of the elopement of Resident #1.
- A Federal Immediate Report was submitted.
- Current facility staff were provided education by the Director of Nursing and Assistant Director of Nursing pertaining to what constitutes resident mistreatment, abuse, neglect, and misappropriation of resident property. Any employees who have not received the training were notified they must receive the training prior to working their next scheduled shift. New employees hired after will receive education during the facility orientation process. Education pertaining to abuse/neglect is provided annually and as needed.
- Facility practices which assist in monitoring/identifying potential abuse and neglect include, but are not limited to: grievance process, complaints resolution process, facility theft and loss reporting, resident council, incident reporting, internal audits of resident trust accounts, daily staffing practices, and regular direct indirect supervision of nursing home employees and resident care by supervisory and administrative staff.
- Root cause analysis was performed by the regional director of clinical services related to the circumstances of the resident elopement. An IDT review and investigation of the residence episode of elopement was completed through the ad hoc copy process. Included in the investigation was reviewed the residence condition preadmission and post admission, resident evaluations including the accuracy of elopement evaluation resident care plan, staffing, facility environments and equipment.
- The residency elopement risk evaluation was completed accurately at the time of admission and a care plan for elopement risk was initiated. The resident was correctly placed on the locked [NAME] wing unit at the time of admission.
- The staffing PPD for licensed nurse assist and for CNA's. On the [NAME] Wing units on the 3:00 PM to 11:00 PM shift, there were two nurses and five CNA's for the 52 residents. 2 weeks staffing calculations (State only Requirement) reviewed with no concerns.
- Staff who predominantly work on the [NAME] Wing were interviewed via a questionnaire and asked if the resident displayed any exit seeking behaviors prior to the incident, verbalizations of wanting to leave, packing belongings, or pushing on exit doors. The staff report no indications of such desire to exit or knowledge of any exit seeking behavior.
- The investigation and root cause analysis revealed potential root cause scenarios (birthday party and push button entrance).
- Elopement risk evaluation facility systems processes in place related to patient identification of potential for elopement/ wandering and safety in place and followed.
- The elopement risk evaluation is completed on admission, quarterly, and after a significant change period the evaluation consists of ambulatory mobility status, wandering behaviors, cognitive status, and exit seeking indicators.
- If a patient is identified as a potential risk, based upon the evaluation, a patient identification form, which will include a current photo, a current description, and personalized care plans, and interventions, and redirection strategies. The patient elopement book contains copy of the patient identification form, a colored photo of the patient and a face sheet. The elopement books are maintained at each nursing station and at the entrance to the reception facility area.
- Facility door prevention maintenance, monitoring and checked for function weekly conducted as scheduled.
- All exit doors are inspected weekly.
- All designated entrance/exit areas have scheduled staff assigned to the receptionist area from 8:00 AM to 8:00 PM seven days a week.
- Staffing schedules are monitored daily by staffing coordinator and reviewed with executive director of nursing and or nursing supervisor on duty to ensure adequate staffing is maintained. Adequate staffing means all minimum PPD, and ratios are met and in addition, staffing is adjusted based on acuity of patient needs.
- All staff are screened prior to hire and a job specific orientation is performed. Receptionist not only receive training but have a completed competency on file.
- A review of five receptionist staff employees' file revealed all had completed training and had a competency on file. The receptionist on duty at the time of the residence elopement was suspended immediately and has subsequently been terminated.
- The maintenance staff performed an inspection of the facility exit doors and screamer devices and all were found to be fully functional.
- Weekly door checks by the Maintenance Director will be performed to ensure proper function. The push button entry system onto the memory care unit was replaced with the keypad the truth device.
- Facility licensed nurses completed a review of the accuracy of 185 current residents elopement risk evaluations. Of the 185 residents, 52 residents resided in the memory care unit and 51 of those who were already assessed to be at risk for elopement. The remaining 1 of 52 residents was originally placed on The [NAME] Wing unit for behavior management but has since become a risk for elopement. The residence assessment was updated to reflect the risk of elopement.
- The care plans and CNA Kardexs' of 52 of 52 residents at risk for elopement were reviewed. All were found to be in compliance with risk for elopement identified.
- Director of Nursing /designee to complete monitoring of new admission evaluations to ensure risk for elopement is accurately identified and care plan and Kardex are reflective of the risk, where appropriate.
- The Medical Director was informed of the citations and is in agreement with the removal plan.
Failure to Prevent Elopement Due to Inadequate Supervision and Security Measures
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency occurred when the facility failed to provide necessary supervision and prevent an elopement for a resident identified as being at risk for elopement. The resident, who had diagnoses including Parkinson's Disease, cognitive impairment, and other significant medical conditions, was admitted to the secured unit due to her risk status. Despite being care planned for elopement risk and having interventions such as placement in a locked unit, the resident was able to exit the facility undetected. On the day of the incident, the resident left the secured unit and exited through the main entrance while the receptionist was distracted by visitors, and no other staff were present at the entrance. The exit door required manual unlocking after a buzzer was engaged, and the receptionist did not notice the resident leaving, as confirmed by surveillance footage. The facility's layout allowed access from the secured unit to the main lobby and entrance through unsecured hallways. Interviews revealed that, prior to the incident, visitors could enter the secured unit without a code but needed a code to exit, and staff did not typically provide codes to visitors. On the day of the incident, a birthday party for another resident in the main dining room resulted in increased visitor traffic, and it was believed that a visitor may have inadvertently allowed the resident to leave the secured unit. Staff did not observe any exit-seeking behaviors from the resident on the day of the incident, and the resident was last seen in the unit's dining room before being discovered missing during a medication pass and dinner. The resident was found by law enforcement several hours later, approximately two miles from the facility, with minor injuries such as abrasions and bruising. She missed multiple scheduled medication doses during her absence. The facility's policy defined elopement as a resident leaving the premises without authorization or necessary supervision, and the resident's care plan specifically identified her as an elopement risk. Despite these measures, the facility failed to ensure effective supervision and security measures to prevent the resident's undetected exit from both the secured unit and the building.
Failure to Honor Resident's Shower Preferences
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to honor a resident's choice regarding showering preferences, as evidenced by the case of a resident with moderate cognitive impairment and physical limitations due to a stroke. The resident expressed a desire for showers instead of bed baths, but records showed she received only one shower in the past 30 days, despite being scheduled for showers twice a week. The resident's care plan indicated she required assistance with bathing, yet her preference for showers was not consistently met. Interviews with staff revealed a lack of awareness and adherence to the resident's shower schedule. A CNA working with the resident was unaware of the designated shower days and relied on the resident's requests to determine when to provide a shower. This lack of communication and adherence to the resident's care plan resulted in the resident's preferences not being honored, as she continued to receive sponge baths instead of the showers she requested.
Inaccurate Advance Directive Care Plan Documented
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to document an accurate Advance Directive care plan for a resident, leading to a discrepancy in the resident's resuscitation preferences. The resident, who had severe cognitive impairment and was dependent on activities of daily living, was receiving hospice services. The care plan inaccurately documented the resident as having an Advance Directive for CPR and being a full code, despite an existing order for DNR and a State of Florida DNR order form. This error was confirmed during an interview with the Central Unit Manager, who acknowledged that the care plan entry was made in error.
Failure to Provide Communication Board for Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide proper care and treatment to maintain a resident's communication abilities, as evidenced by the absence of a communication board for a resident with a documented communication problem. The resident, who was admitted to hospice services with multiple diagnoses including anxiety disorder, major depressive disorder, persistent mood disorder, panic disorder, and dementia, was dependent on assistance with activities of daily living. The resident's care plan, in place since May 2023, included the intervention of having a communication board at the bedside as needed. However, during observations, the communication board was not present, and the resident struggled to communicate her needs effectively. On two separate occasions, the resident attempted to communicate her needs using non-verbal cues and limited verbal communication. In one instance, the resident motioned for assistance with her incontinence brief, but the CNA misunderstood her request and left to get a drink of water instead. In another instance, the resident indicated she wanted food by touching her fingertips to her mouth, which was eventually understood by the CNA. These interactions highlight the communication challenges faced by the resident due to the absence of the communication board, which was a planned intervention in her care plan.
Deficiencies in Medication Administration and Resident Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to address a skin condition in a timely manner for a resident who was admitted with fragile skin and was care planned for potential skin impairment. Despite having orders for Zinc and Hydrocortisone Cream to treat a rash, and a dermatology consult ordered, the resident experienced severe itching for about three weeks without seeing a dermatologist. The Social Service Director acknowledged the delay in arranging the dermatology consultation, which resulted in the resident not being seen until the next scheduled visit. Another resident was prescribed medications for high blood pressure and coronary artery disease, but the facility failed to provide these medications as ordered. Nurses held the medications based on low heart rate without any parameters and did not notify the physician of the held medications. The Director of Nursing agreed with the findings that there were no parameters to hold the medications, indicating a lack of proper communication and adherence to physician orders. Additionally, the facility did not follow physician orders for another resident's blood pressure medications, administering them outside the specified parameters. The Licensed Practical Nurse admitted to not being aware of the PRN medication orders and not following the parameters. Furthermore, a resident with a doctor's order to use a pillow between her legs to prevent knee adduction and lower body contractures was observed without the pillow, and staff were not aware of the requirement. The Director of Rehabilitation acknowledged the need for staff training on proper wheelchair positioning and the use of a pillow between the resident's knees.
Failure to Discard and Document Controlled Medications
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to properly manage and document the administration and disposal of controlled medications for several residents. For Resident #64, multiple packs of Lorazepam were found in the medication cart, despite the resident having only two specific orders for the medication, both related to dental procedures. The Director of Nursing (DON) acknowledged that the pharmacy continued to send the medication unnecessarily, and the unused medication should have been returned to the pharmacy. For Resident #124, a medication pack containing 16 pills of Lorazepam was found, although the medication had been discontinued months earlier. The Controlled Medication Utilization Record showed that Lorazepam was removed for administration on two occasions, but there was no documentation of administration on the Medication Administration Record (MAR). Similarly, for Resident #263, Lorazepam was removed multiple times for administration, but there was no evidence of administration documented on the MAR. Staff acknowledged these discrepancies, and the DON confirmed that unused medications should have been returned to the pharmacy.
Unsecured Medication and Treatment Carts Found in Facility
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure safe medication storage for one of its medication carts on the D Unit and one treatment cart on the West Unit. On January 27, 2025, a medication cart on the D Unit was found unattended and unlocked, with the lock not fully engaged, allowing easy access to medications for 22 residents. An independently ambulatory resident was observed near the cart, and no staff were present in the hallway. The Assistant Director of Nursing acknowledged the concern when informed. Later, a Licensed Practical Nurse returned to the cart and attempted to open it without a key, indicating a misunderstanding about the lock's engagement. Additionally, on January 27, 2024, a treatment cart on the West Unit was observed unlocked and unattended in a locked memory care unit. The cart contained various wound care supplies and medicated ointments, including sharp instruments. Multiple cognitively impaired residents were seen moving around the area. A Registered Nurse confirmed the findings when notified. The presence of independently ambulatory residents in both units posed a risk due to the unsecured carts.
Failure to Provide Proper Pureed Diets
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide food in a pureed form to meet the individual needs of three residents who were on a medically ordered pureed diet. Resident #46, diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease and dementia, was observed receiving a meal that included pureed cabbage and rice, which were lumpy, contrary to the facility's policy that pureed foods should be smooth and free of lumps. Similarly, Resident #48, who has Alzheimer's disease and oropharyngeal dysphagia, was served mashed potatoes that contained a large lump, which the resident struggled to consume. Resident #65, with a history of cerebrovascular accident, dementia, and aphasia, was also served a meal with lumpy pureed cabbage and rice. During an interview, the Food Service Director acknowledged the presence of lumps in the pureed rice and strands in the pureed stir fry vegetables, which were not consistent with the required smooth texture for a pureed diet. The facility's failure to adhere to the pureed diet requirements as per the National Dysphagia Definition and their own policy resulted in the provision of meals that were not suitable for residents with dysphagia, potentially compromising their ability to safely consume their meals.
Failure to Accommodate Resident's Food Preferences
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to accommodate a resident's food preferences and offer an alternative food option after the resident refused a meal. The resident, who was unable to communicate effectively due to a low Brief Interview of Mental Status score, had specific dietary dislikes including mayonnaise, rice, and red meat. Despite these documented preferences, the resident was served meals containing these disliked items, such as turkey salad with mayonnaise and ground pepper steak with pureed rice. The resident's care plan indicated increased nutritional needs due to a diagnosis of Malignant Neoplasm of Breast, yet her weight had decreased significantly over a short period. Observations revealed that the resident consumed very little of the meals provided, and when questioned, staff offered a nutritional supplement instead of an alternative meal. The resident's family had previously communicated her food preferences to the Registered Dietitian, but these preferences were not consistently honored. The facility's failure to provide meals in accordance with the resident's documented dislikes and preferences contributed to the resident's inadequate nutritional intake.
Food Safety and Sanitation Deficiencies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to adhere to professional standards for food service safety, sanitary conditions, and the prevention of foodborne illnesses, potentially affecting 158 of 165 residents. During an initial tour of the Main Kitchen, a personal backpack was found on a shelf below the food preparation area, resting on dishware. In the dry storage room, a gray plastic bin was observed with dark colored sediment on the handle and inside the bottom of the container, as well as on the handles of at least four scoop serving utensils. Additionally, the Cleveland steamer had brown/red wet residue around the perimeter of the upper steamer and the upper exterior of the lower steamer. These observations were acknowledged by the Food Service Director during the tour. In a separate tour of the nourishment room in the [NAME] Wing, an opened plastic container of Med Plus 2.0 Nutritional Drink was found on a refrigerator shelf without a date indicating when it was opened, contrary to the manufacturer's instructions to refrigerate and consume within four days. An unlabeled styrofoam cup with liquid was also found on a refrigerator shelf, lacking a product name, resident's name, or date. These findings were acknowledged by the Director of Nursing during the tour.
Latest citations in Florida
Surveyors found that the facility failed to comply with 42 CFR 483.73(a) by not conducting the required annual review and update of its Emergency Preparedness (EP) plan. During record review, no documentation showed that the EP plan had been reviewed or updated within the past year, and the Administrator confirmed that the Emergency Management Plan had not been reviewed or revised as required.
Surveyors found that smoke/fire-rated enclosures were not properly maintained, with penetrations in smoke barriers in several general storage rooms across multiple smoke compartments. The Maintenance Director stated that insulation and fiberglass were used to pack and cover these holes but could not confirm that the materials were approved for fire-rated construction. Inspectors observed penetrations covered with fiberglass and noted a hole in one fiberglass panel in a storage room, resulting in a deficiency under NFPA 101 requirements for smoke barrier construction.
Surveyors found that fixed patient-care electrical equipment was not properly maintained or inspected in accordance with NFPA 99. In one room, a bedside remote had mismatched insulation and exposed wiring, and in another room, a call button receptacle had exposed low-voltage conductors. The Maintenance Director acknowledged both issues and reported that new bed remotes had been received but not yet installed.
Surveyors found that the facility failed to maintain a safe, clean, and homelike environment, with strong, persistent urine and feces odors noted throughout multiple halls and confirmed by staff. On two nursing units, hallways and resident rooms contained torn flooring, food debris, broken blinds, dirty and leaking toilets and sinks, rusted and corroded fixtures, missing outlet covers with oxygen concentrators plugged in, exposed light sockets, unmade and visibly soiled beds, and black, mold-like substances on walls and around toilet bases. Bathrooms had missing ceiling tiles, cracked door facings with brown stains, used briefs and torn toilet paper on floors, and toilets with brown or rust-like buildup. Outside, the patio and fencing area had broken and rotted railings, exposed rusted nails, fallen palm fronds, and overgrown vegetation, and the Administrator acknowledged the area was not safe for residents. Housekeeping and maintenance staff described daily cleaning and a work-order process, but the Maintenance Director reported being unaware of many of the observed issues, and the DON confirmed there was no specific environmental cleaning policy despite job descriptions and a general policy requiring a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment.
A resident exited the building through a bedroom window, walked off the property, and was observed and redirected by staff with assistance from law enforcement, who encountered the resident down the road and helped escort the resident back. The facility’s internal documentation lacked staff or witness statements and characterized the event as the resident remaining on facility grounds without injury. Despite the resident’s account, a police report, and a maintenance staff report confirming that the resident left the premises and that law enforcement responded, the DON did not report the incident to required state and federal agencies, even though the DON acknowledged that any incident involving law enforcement response must be reported.
A resident with moderate cognitive impairment and a history of stroke was repeatedly observed over several days in visibly soiled clothing and bedding, with a strong urine odor, despite stating multiple times that he had requested assistance with changing and hygiene. Documentation indicated he was independent with toileting and personal hygiene and only occasionally incontinent, but his care plan lacked detail on the level of assistance needed, while an LPN reported he actually required staff help with bathing, grooming, toileting, and care. Laundry practices involved leaving clean, labeled clothing bagged in the linen room for nursing staff to distribute rather than returning it directly to rooms, and the DON reported that staff were expected to round every two hours and as needed to keep residents clean and dry, although there were no written ADL or resident care policies in place.
Surveyors observed four full O2 cylinders on one nursing unit stored unsecured directly on the floor under a sign labeled "FULL CYLINDERS" instead of in a secured storage rack. The ADON confirmed the cylinders were full and should not be on the ground. Reference to NFPA 99 showed that freestanding cylinders must be protected from damage and properly chained or supported in a stand or cart. The DON and Maintenance Director both acknowledged that O2 cylinders are required to be stored in a secure rack, should never be on the floor, and that unsecured cylinders on the floor present a safety risk.
A resident with multiple cardiopulmonary conditions and a documented full code status was found unresponsive without pulse or respirations during the night shift. A CNA notified the RN, who either instructed CNAs to clean and cover the resident or, per her and an LPN’s account, called a code blue and performed CPR with the LPN for about 20 minutes before stopping, without calling 911. The RN believed the resident was on hospice and did not verify code status, then notified the DON, provider, and family instead of EMS. Several hours later, after the DON called the facility and asked whether 911 had been contacted, the RN called 911 and briefly reinitiated CPR shortly before EMS arrived and pronounced the resident deceased, documenting postmortem changes. The facility’s investigation and root cause analysis found that staff failed to follow policy requiring immediate EMS activation and continuous CPR for full code residents until EMS arrival, leading to an Immediate Jeopardy finding.
A resident with full code status was found unresponsive without respirations or pulse during the night shift. An RN and an LPN initiated CPR but did not activate EMS, and they discontinued CPR after about 20 minutes. The RN, who lacked documented orientation and competency assessment and had obtained BLS certification through a fully online, non–instructor-led course, pronounced the resident deceased without authority and later stated she believed the resident was on hospice and did not verify code status. The LPN’s BLS certification was expired, and a CNA with an expired BLS certification performed several chest compressions despite facility policy that CNAs were not to perform CPR. The RN had not participated in documented code blue drills, and leadership confirmed that required clinical orientation and skills competencies had not been completed for her, leading surveyors to determine that staff were not adequately trained or competent to respond to a cardiopulmonary arrest for a full code resident, resulting in an Immediate Jeopardy finding.
Surveyors found multiple instances of improper use of relocatable power taps (RPTs) and extension cords during a facility tour with the Maintenance Director. In the social services office, an RPT was plugged into another RPT connected to a wall outlet, with the cord running across a walkway and taped to the floor. In the multipurpose room, a television was plugged into an extension cord, and in the MDS office, an RPT was plugged into another RPT with an outlet adapter in use. These conditions did not comply with NFPA 101, NFPA 99, and NFPA 70 standards governing electrical equipment, power strips, and extension cords.
Failure to Annually Review and Update Emergency Preparedness Plan
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors identified a deficiency related to the facility’s Emergency Preparedness (EP) Program under 42 CFR 483.73(a). During record review at 4:00 PM, surveyors examined the facility’s EP documentation and found no evidence that the emergency preparedness plan had been reviewed or updated on an annual basis as required. The regulation mandates that LTC facilities develop and maintain an emergency preparedness plan that is reviewed and updated at least annually to comply with applicable Federal, State, and local emergency preparedness requirements. In an interview, the Administrator acknowledged that the facility’s Emergency Management Plan had not been reviewed or updated. No documentation was provided to show that the required annual review and update of the EP plan had occurred. The deficiency is based solely on the lack of documented annual review and update of the emergency preparedness plan by facility administration; no specific resident cases or clinical events were described in the report.
Plan Of Correction
Preparation and/or execution of the Plan of Correction does not constitute admission or agreement of the provider of the truth of the facts alleged or conclusions set forth in the statement of deficiencies. The Plan of Correction is prepared and/or executed solely because it is required by the provision of Federal and State law. Facility EP was reviewed and signed off on by the DON, Maintenance Director and Administrator. The facility has determined that all residents have the potential to be affected. An in-service education program will be conducted by the administrator. The administrator will conduct monthly random checks to verify completed documentation.
Improper Repair of Smoke Barrier Penetrations in Multiple Smoke Compartments
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors identified a deficiency in the facility’s maintenance of smoke/fire-rated enclosures, specifically related to penetrations in smoke barriers in multiple smoke compartments. During an interview, the Maintenance Director reported that insulation was used to pack holes and then covered with fiberglass in general storage rooms in smoke compartments 1, 2, and 3, but was unable to confirm whether these materials were approved for use in fire-rated walls. Subsequent observation showed that the penetrations were indeed covered with fiberglass, and one general storage room in smoke compartment 2 had a hole in one of the fiberglass panels. The report states that this failure to properly maintain penetrations through smoke/fire-rated construction could allow smoke and flammable gases to spread to other areas and cause the smoke/fire-rated construction to fail to perform as designed.
Failure to Maintain and Inspect Patient-Care Electrical Equipment
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors identified a deficiency in the facility’s compliance with NFPA 99 requirements for testing and maintaining fixed patient-care electrical equipment. During an observation in one resident room, the bedside remote was found to have two different types of insulation and exposed wiring. In another resident room, the call button receptacle was observed with exposed low-voltage conductors. These conditions were noted during a survey of two of six smoke compartments. During an interview conducted at the time of the observations, the Maintenance Director stated that the facility had just received a new shipment of bed remotes and had not yet replaced the existing ones. The Maintenance Director also acknowledged the issue with the exposed conductors at the call button receptacle. The surveyors cited this as a failure to properly inspect and maintain fixed patient care electrical equipment in accordance with NFPA 99 (2012 Edition), sections 10.3 and 10.5.2.1.
Widespread Odors and Environmental Disrepair in Resident Care Areas
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors identified that the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment as required by 42 CFR 483.10(i). Upon entrance to the building on multiple days, surveyors noted a strong, pungent odor of urine and feces throughout the facility, with the odor particularly strong on the 200, 300, and 400 halls. Staff interviews confirmed that the building "usually smells like" urine, and staff attributed the odor to residents defecating and urinating on the floor, an old building structure, and cleaning products that sanitize but do not deodorize. Housekeeping staff reported that they clean resident rooms daily but that nursing staff must first clean fecal and urine waste before housekeeping can sanitize, and delays by nursing staff in doing so postponed housekeeping’s ability to address the odors. On the 300 unit, surveyors observed multiple environmental and sanitation issues in resident rooms and bathrooms. The hallway had torn flooring, food particles, and a butter knife on the floor. Individual rooms had food debris, a straw on the floor, and broken blinds. Bathrooms contained dark brown stains on walls, rusted ceiling tile trim, toilets with brownish substances inside, and wet floors around toilets. Trim was missing around toilet bases, exposing a black, mold-like substance. Corroded and rusted sink faucet handles, leaking faucets, rusted pipes under sinks with buildup of corrosion, and rusted sprinklers were observed. Some toilets and three-in-one commodes had duct tape on them, and bathroom walls had black, mold-like substances. Doors and door facings showed rust, scrape marks, chipped and peeling paint, and exposed wood. In some rooms, electrical outlets had no covers while oxygen concentrators were plugged into them, boards covered windows, light fixtures over beds lacked covers with sockets exposed, and one fixture had only one bulb. A resident bed appeared dirty with a black substance on it, and dresser drawers were broken with drawer fronts on the floor. On the 400 unit, surveyors again noted a strong odor of urine upon entry and found additional environmental deficiencies. Bathrooms had missing ceiling tiles, broken emergency light covers with no pull strings, and toilet tank covers that did not fit properly, exposing the inside of the tank. In one bathroom, torn toilet paper and used briefs were lying in the corner of the floor, and toilets had brown, rust-like substances inside the bowls. Door facings appeared cracked with brown substances along the sides, and toilets had brownish-black buildup around the bases with broken, peeling trim. Light bases on walls had rust-like appearances, multiple rooms had broken or missing blinds, and some outlets lacked covers while oxygen concentrators were plugged into them. Some rooms had unmade beds, exposed wires at outlets, toilets with dark brown-black rings around the base and flooring, uncovered light fixtures, leaking sinks with rusted pipes, loose flooring, loose toilet seats, and dry red substances on door frames. Surveyors also observed deficiencies in the outdoor patio area adjacent to the locked unit. The gate code was broken, and a resident lock was placed on the gate. The patio and surrounding fencing had fallen palm fronds on the grass, broken and rotted wooden fence railings, unsteady railings, and multiple exposed rusted nails protruding from the railings where boards were broken or detached. Overgrown trees and bushes from the perimeter extended through the fence railings. When asked, the Administrator acknowledged that the area was not safe for residents and stated that they planned to have it redone in the future. The Maintenance Director reported that he and one other maintenance person relied on work orders and verbal reports to identify needed repairs and stated he was not aware of the specific room and equipment issues on the 300 and 400 units. Housekeeping staff stated they would report broken items via a work order book or text to maintenance, but one housekeeper, who cleaned the 400 unit daily, denied noticing stains or biohazard-like materials on walls and door frames despite the surveyors’ observations. Review of facility documents showed that the housekeeper job description required staff to maintain assigned work areas in a clean, safe, comfortable, and attractive manner and to report maintenance problems noted during cleaning. A facility policy titled "Policies and Practices - Control" stated that the facility must maintain a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment for personnel, residents, visitors, and the public. The DON stated that blinds had been changed out and new cabinets and door handles purchased, and that staff were directed to use standard precautions when cleaning rooms, but also stated there was no policy specific to cleaning the environment. These observations and interviews demonstrated that the facility did not maintain sanitary, orderly, and comfortable interior conditions, did not adequately control offensive odors, and did not ensure that the physical environment, including resident rooms, bathrooms, and outdoor areas, was maintained in a safe, clean, and homelike condition as required by regulation.
Failure to Report Elopement Incident Involving Law Enforcement
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to report an elopement incident to required state and federal agencies as mandated by 42 CFR 483.12(c). On the referenced date, Resident #5 exited the building through his bedroom window around 12:15 PM and walked across the facility property toward the perimeter fence. A CNA observed the resident outside and called for assistance, after which staff redirected and escorted the resident back into the building and placed him on one-to-one supervision. The facility’s internal incident documentation noted the window exit and subsequent maintenance inspection of the window seals but did not include any staff or witness statements. The DON later stated that the resident never left facility grounds and was returned without injury, and therefore the incident was not considered reportable. However, interviews and external records showed that the resident did leave the facility premises and that law enforcement was involved. Resident #5 recalled being outside the facility, being brought back by staff and a “police man,” and being told by the officer not to leave again. A police report from the local police department confirmed an encounter with the resident outside the facility and that an officer assisted staff in escorting him back. Maintenance staff (Staff G) also reported that the resident climbed out the window, left the facility property, and was stopped “down the road,” then redirected back with law enforcement assistance. In interviews, the DON initially denied that law enforcement had been notified or involved, then later acknowledged that law enforcement had responded but asserted they did not come into the facility. The DON also confirmed awareness that any incident in which law enforcement investigates or responds is required to be reported, yet the elopement and law enforcement involvement were not reported to the State Survey Agency or other required officials within the required time frames.
Failure to Provide Timely ADL and Hygiene Care to a Dependent Resident
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors found that the facility failed to provide necessary ADL care, including grooming and hygiene, to a dependent resident over multiple days. The resident was repeatedly observed in visibly soiled clothing with a strong odor of urine, first standing in his doorway holding onto a wheelchair with wet navy pants saturated down to his calves, stating he had been waiting for staff to change his clothes. More than an hour later the same day, he remained in the same soiled pants and shirt while seated in a wheelchair near the nurses’ station. The following day, he was again observed wearing the same soiled clothes, smelling of urine, with his shirt stained with food and a dark liquid. His room had a strong urine odor, his bed was soiled with urine, and only two pairs of pants were seen on a chair with no other clothing available in the room. On a subsequent observation, he was seated on the edge of his bed wearing different pants and no shirt, with yellow-stained sheets beneath him and his previously soiled clothes on the floor; he reported that he had requested assistance but no staff had come, so he changed himself. Record review showed the resident had a history of stroke and repeated unspecified conditions, with a recent Quarterly MDS indicating moderate cognitive impairment (BIMS score of 10). The MDS documented him as independent for toileting, showering, personal hygiene, and related ADLs, and only occasionally incontinent, but his care plan did not specify the level of assistance he required for incontinence care and other ADLs. In contrast, an LPN familiar with the resident stated he required staff assistance with bathing, grooming, toileting, and care, and that he did not refuse such assistance and appropriately requested help. The LPN also explained that personal clothing was laundered at the facility and left bagged in the linen room for nursing staff to distribute, rather than being returned directly to resident rooms. The DON stated that staff were expected to follow best practices, including rounding every two hours and as needed to keep residents clean and dry, and acknowledged that all residents required some level of assistance with ADLs. The DON further stated the facility had no written ADL, resident care, or quality of care policies, despite these expectations.
Unsecured Storage of Full Oxygen Cylinders on Nursing Unit
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors found that the facility failed to ensure safe storage of oxygen cylinders on the West 1 unit. At 9:03 a.m., four full oxygen cylinders were observed stored unsecured directly on the ground rather than in the designated secured cylinder storage rack, under a sign labeled "FULL CYLINDERS." Photographic evidence was obtained of this condition. At 9:18 a.m., the ADON confirmed that the four cylinders were full and acknowledged they should not be stored on the ground. Review of NFPA 99 (2021) 11.6.2.3(11) indicated that cylinders must be protected from damage and that freestanding cylinders must be properly chained or supported in a proper stand or cart. Later that day, the DON stated that oxygen cylinders should be stored in a secure rack and never directly on the ground, and acknowledged that unsecured cylinders on the floor were a safety risk. The Maintenance Director also confirmed that oxygen cylinders should be in a secure rack and never stored directly on the ground, stating that cylinders stored on the floor can tip over and cause damage. These observations and interviews demonstrated noncompliance with regulatory and NFPA standards for safe storage of oxygen cylinders.
Plan Of Correction
This plan of correction constitutes a written allegation of compliance for the deficiency cited. Submission of this plan of correction is not an admission that the deficiency exists or that one was cited correctly. This plan of correction is submitted to meet the requirements established by the State and Federal law. The four unsecured [R] cylinders on the West 1 unit were secured. The Nursing Department completed a baseline audit of [R] cylinder storage within the facility to ensure all [R] cylinders were secured and stored properly. Ongoing education will be completed with current facility staff regarding the facility's [R] storage policy and procedure; and will be completed during new hire and agency orientation to the facility by ADON/designee. Audits will be completed by the Director of Nursing/designee regarding adherence to the facility's [R] storage policy and procedure twice weekly x 4 weeks, then weekly x 4 weeks, then monthly x 4 months, or until continued substantial compliance has been met. Results of audits will be reported to the QAPI Committee on a monthly basis by the Director of Nursing/designee.
Failure to Provide Required CPR and Activate EMS for Full Code Resident
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to provide immediate and appropriate basic life support, including CPR, to a resident with a documented full code status when the resident was found unresponsive. The resident had diagnoses including a slow-progressing circulatory condition involving narrowing or blockage of vessels, a condition that restricts airflow and makes breathing difficult, and other listed conditions. The physician’s order specified “Full Code,” and the care plan documented that the resident was under court-ordered guardianship with wishes honored as full code. The facility’s policy required that in the event of cardiac or respiratory arrest, staff immediately call for assistance, overhead page a code, begin CPR in the absence of a valid DNR, and continue CPR until EMS assumes responsibility or the resident responds. On the night of the incident at approximately 2:00–2:07 a.m., a CNA found the resident unresponsive in bed and notified the RN on duty. One CNA’s written statement indicated that the RN said she already knew the resident was going to die and instructed the CNA to clean and cover the resident. Another CNA’s account stated that the RN came to the room, took vital signs, and then instructed her to clean the resident. The RN’s own written statement and interview indicated that she called a code blue, that an LPN brought the crash cart, and that they performed CPR for approximately 20 minutes. The LPN’s statement corroborated that a code blue was called, that he brought the crash cart, and that CPR was performed for about 20 minutes before the RN stopped and stated that the resident was gone or words to that effect. The RN acknowledged that the resident had no vital signs but was warm and not responding, and she stated that she believed the resident was on hospice and therefore did not call 911. After CPR was discontinued, the RN did not activate EMS and instead notified the DON, the provider, and the resident’s family. The DON documented receiving a message from the RN that the resident had no pulse and no blood pressure and that the assigned nurse had initiated CPR but was unable to revive the resident. The DON later received a text from the RN that the resident had expired. The DON stated that at approximately 6:00 a.m. she called the facility and asked if 911 had been called, and upon learning it had not, she instructed the RN to call 911. The RN then reinitiated CPR at around 6:00 a.m., approximately four hours after the resident was first found without pulse or respirations, and stated that they tried to do something until EMS arrived because EMS had to see them doing CPR. EMS records showed activation at 6:18 a.m., arrival at 6:27 a.m., and pronouncement of death at 6:31 a.m., with documentation that CPR was not attempted by EMS because it was considered futile and that the resident exhibited postmortem changes. The Medical Director confirmed that the resident was full code and stated that staff should have started CPR and called 911 and that CPR should not be done four hours after a resident is pronounced dead. The facility’s investigation and a root cause analysis concluded that the RN and LPN did not follow the facility’s established policy and procedure to call 911 and administer CPR to a full code resident until EMS arrival. The root cause was identified as the nurse’s belief that the resident was on hospice and her failure to check the resident’s code status as outlined in facility policy. The surveyors determined that the failure to immediately activate EMS and to continue CPR until EMS arrival for this full code resident constituted noncompliance with the requirement to provide basic life support and resulted in an Immediate Jeopardy determination.
Plan Of Correction
This plan of correction is submitted as required under Federal and State regulations and statutes applicable to long term care providers. This plan of correction does not constitute an admission of liability on the part of the facility, and such liability is hereby specifically denied. The submission of this plan does not constitute agreement by the facility that the surveyors' findings or conclusions are accurate, that the findings constitute a deficiency, or that the scope or severity regarding any of these deficiencies cited are correctly applied. Resident #1 no longer resides in the facility as of 4.7.26. This has the potential to affect all residents in the facility. All codes to 1.1.26 were reviewed to ensure protocol was followed. No outliers were noted. All licensed nurses received education from the Director of Nursing and/or nursing management on [R] policy and procedure and Florida [R] policy. This includes where to find the code status. Education addressed what to do for full code hospice residents. Education completed with CNA's that protocol is that they do not assist with [R] or breaths during a [R] event. All education will be added to new hire orientation. Code drills will occur 3 x weekly x 4 weeks, followed by 2 x weekly x 4 weeks, followed by 1 x weekly x 4 weeks. Results will be brought to QAPI to determine need for ongoing auditing.
Removal Plan
- Educated licensed nurses on CPR policy and procedure and Florida Do Not Resuscitate (DNRO) policy, including where to find code status and what to do for full code hospice residents; emphasized initiating emergency services immediately when resident is full code, continuing CPR until EMS arrives, and that nurses cannot pronounce death or stop CPR on a full code resident unless instructed by EMS.
- Implemented emergency response “Code Blue” drills on all three shifts, including full code and full code hospice scenarios, with emphasis on calling 911 immediately.
- Educated licensed nurses and CNAs on the facility abuse and neglect policy, including resident rights.
- Required licensed nurses to complete a CPR post-test; restricted staff who have not completed education/testing from working until completion.
- Educated licensed nurses regarding change in condition.
- Placed laminated instructions on how to overhead page during a code at all nursing station phones and other designated phones.
- Held a Quality Improvement Performance Committee meeting to review root cause analysis findings and approve recommendations.
- Held a Quality Improvement Performance Committee meeting to review progress of the plan and approve recommendations.
- Completed a “like resident” audit of all expired residents and rehospitalizations for a defined period to determine whether involved staff were the same as the code event and whether proper procedure was followed.
Failure to Provide Competent CPR Response and Verify Code Status for Full Code Resident
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to ensure that nursing staff possessed and demonstrated the competencies required to respond appropriately to a cardiopulmonary emergency for a resident with full code status. Resident #1, who was designated as full code, was found unresponsive and without respirations or pulse at approximately 2:07 a.m. Clinical staff, consisting of an RN (Staff A) and an LPN (Staff B), initiated CPR but did not activate Emergency Medical Services (EMS) as required by facility policy for a full code resident. After approximately 20 minutes of CPR, the RN and LPN stopped resuscitation efforts without EMS involvement. The RN, without authority to do so, pronounced the resident deceased based on the absence of vital signs and did not verify the resident’s code status before discontinuing CPR. The RN later stated she believed the resident was on hospice and therefore did not call 911, and that she was confused about which residents were hospice and which were full code. The LPN reported that he assumed the RN had called 911 and continued CPR for about 20 minutes until the RN “called the code” and left, and he acknowledged that he knew CPR should continue until EMS arrival but did not speak up. Four hours after CPR was stopped, at approximately 6:00 a.m., the RN restarted CPR and activated EMS after receiving instructions from the DON. The investigation further identified that the RN had no documented orientation, onboarding education, or skills competency assessments since hire, despite being promoted to weekend supervisor. Her BLS certification had been obtained through a fully online course without an instructor or live feedback. The LPN’s BLS certification was expired, and a CNA who performed several chest compressions also had an expired BLS certification, even though facility policy did not permit CNAs to perform CPR. Facility records showed that monthly code blue drills had been conducted, but there was no documentation that the RN had ever participated in these drills. Leadership interviews confirmed that required clinical orientation and competency evaluations had not been completed for the RN, and that she had failed tests for a clinical manager position but was nonetheless functioning in a supervisory role. These actions and omissions led surveyors to determine that staff were not adequately trained or competent to respond to cardiopulmonary arrest for residents with full code status, resulting in an Immediate Jeopardy determination. The facility’s own root cause analysis, as reflected in meeting minutes, identified that the nurse did not check the resident’s code status and lacked knowledge about when CPR could be discontinued and when 911 should be called. The analysis documented that the nurse believed the resident was hospice and therefore did not start or continue CPR appropriately or call EMS when the resident was found without respirations and pulse. The facility assessment tool and policies referenced the need for staff training and competencies in identifying changes in condition, end-of-life care, advance care planning, and adherence to the CPR policy, but the documented events showed that these expectations were not met in practice for the staff involved in this incident. Surveyors concluded that the failure to ensure nursing staff were trained and competent to respond appropriately to cardiopulmonary arrest for a full code resident, including immediate initiation and continuation of CPR and activation of EMS, constituted noncompliance with requirements for sufficient and competent nursing staff. The failure affected Resident #1 and placed other full code residents at risk, leading to an Immediate Jeopardy finding that was later reduced in scope and severity after verification of an acceptable Immediate Jeopardy removal plan.
Plan Of Correction
This plan of correction is submitted as required under Federal and State regulations and statutes applicable to long term care providers. This plan of correction does not constitute an admission of liability on the part of the facility, and such liability is hereby specifically denied. The submission of this plan does not constitute agreement by the facility that the surveyors' findings or conclusions are accurate, that the findings constitute a deficiency, or that the scope or severity regarding any of these deficiencies cited are correctly applied Resident # 1 no longer resides in the facility as of 4.7.26. This has the potential to affect all residents in the facility. All licensed nurses were audited to ensure current [R] certification. Facility will ensure [R] certification through a [R] provider whose training includes a [R] on session either in a physical or virtual instructor-led setting in accordance with accepted national standards. Human resources, or designee, will audit monthly to ensure all licensed nurses have a current [R] certification.Education was completed with licensed nurses on initiating [R] services immediately when a resident is full code. Education included that [R] is to continue on a full code resident until [R] arrives and that the nurse cannot pronounce [R] on the full code resident and/or stop [R] until instructed by [R].Education will be added to new hire orientation.7 random licensed nurses will complete a knowledge quiz related to code events. Per week x 4 weeks, followed by 5 nurses x 4 weeks, then 3 nurses x 4 weeks. Results will be brought to QAPI to determine need for ongoing auditing.
Removal Plan
- Regional Director of Clinical Services educated the Administrator and Director of Nursing regarding the CPR policy and the need to immediately contact emergency medical services (911) in the event of a full code; Administrator and DON signed the education
- Regional Director of Clinical Services provided documented education to the Administrator and Director of Nursing regarding the CPR policy and the need to immediately contact emergency medical services (911) in the event of a full code
- Director of Nursing and/or nursing management educated all licensed nurses on the CPR policy and procedure, including where to find code status and what to do for full code hospice residents
- Reinforced through education that CPR must be initiated immediately for full code residents, continued until EMS arrives, and that nurses cannot pronounce death or stop CPR on a full code resident unless instructed by EMS
- Conducted an Ad Hoc Quality Improvement Performance Committee meeting to review root cause analysis recommendations related to the incident; recommendations approved
- Conducted a follow-up Ad Hoc Quality Improvement Performance Committee meeting to review progress on the plan; recommendations approved
Improper Use of Power Strips and Extension Cords in Multiple Facility Areas
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors identified deficiencies related to the use and maintenance of relocatable power taps (RPTs) and extension cords that did not comply with NFPA 101, NFPA 99, and NFPA 70 requirements. During a facility tour conducted between 11:00 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. with the Maintenance Director, surveyors observed in the social services office an RPT plugged into another RPT, which was then plugged into a wall outlet, with the cord running across a walkway and taped to the floor. In the multipurpose room, a television was found plugged into an extension cord, contrary to standards that prohibit using extension cords as a substitute for fixed wiring and require temporary extensions to be removed immediately after use. Further observations included the MDS office, where an RPT was plugged into another RPT and an outlet adapter was in use. These configurations did not meet the NFPA 99 provisions governing the proper use of power strips and extension cords, including requirements that power strips be appropriately rated and used only as intended, and that extension cords not be used as permanent wiring. During concurrent interviews, the Maintenance Director acknowledged these findings as they were observed by the surveyors.
Plan Of Correction
The RPT observed plugged into an RPT plugged into an outlet in the Social Services Office was removed. The extension cord used to plug in the television in the multipurpose room was removed. The RPT plugged into an RPT and outlet adapter in the MDS office was removed. Additional offices and resident care areas will be reviewed for the improper use of plug adapters, power strips and extension. The Executive Director/designee will educate the Maintenance Director on the importance of NFPA 101 Electrical Equipment- Power and Extension specific to the improper use of plug adapters, power strips, and extension and will continue to monitor in accordance with NFPA standards. Any findings will be reported to the monthly QAPI Committee for further review. The RPT observed plugged into an RPT plugged into an outlet in the Social Services Office was removed. The extension cord used to plug in the television in the multipurpose room was removed. The RPT plugged into an RPT and outlet adapter in the MDS office was removed. Additional offices and resident care areas will be reviewed for the improper use of plug adapters, power strips and extension. The Executive Director/designee will educate the Maintenance Director on the importance of NFPA 101 Electrical Equipment - Power and Extension specific to the improper use of plug adapters, power strips, and extension and will continue to monitor in accordance with NFPA standards. Any findings will be reported to the monthly QAPI Committee for further review.
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.



