Not rated by CMS — ratings are suppressed for new or low-volume facilities.
A standard survey is most likely before around December 2026
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of June 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Berkshire Place during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident with intact cognition and psychiatric diagnoses sustained a left eyebrow laceration when another resident with a documented history of escalating aggressive and threatening behaviors struck them with a cane during a hallway dispute. The aggressive resident had multiple prior documented incidents, including verbal threats to kill others, attacking a roommate with a cane over TV volume, throwing objects during activities, and throwing a lunch plate at staff. Despite these events, the care plan was not updated with interventions to address physical aggression toward other residents, and a psychiatric recommendation for PRN trazodone for agitation, anxiety, and insomnia was only implemented as PRN for insomnia. The failure to assess, monitor, and implement effective interventions for the aggressive resident’s behaviors led to the assault and injury and, per the report, placed this and other residents at risk of serious physical and psychosocial harm.
A resident with impulse disorder, mood and anxiety diagnoses, and a history of escalating verbal and physical aggression had multiple documented incidents of threats, object throwing, and assault with a cane. Despite a psychiatric consult recommending PRN trazodone for agitation, anxiety, and insomnia, the provider order listed insomnia only, and the care plan was not updated with specific interventions to address the resident’s physically aggressive behaviors after several documented events. Subsequently, the resident struck another resident with a cane, causing a facial laceration that required wound closure and ongoing treatment.
The facility failed to provide ordered catheter care for three residents with Foley and suprapubic (SP) catheters. One resident with neurogenic bladder had physician orders for monthly Foley changes and evaluation by urology when urine became cloudy and blood-tinged, but records showed no Foley exchange after a prior hospital procedure and no evidence that urology was contacted, despite later emergency room findings of a crusted catheter, meatal erosion, urinary retention, and foul-smelling urine. A second resident with malignancies and an SP catheter had an order for urology follow-up and a documented plan for an SP exchange at four weeks in the facility, yet records showed no SP exchange after the last urology visit, even though nursing staff were reportedly competent to perform SP exchanges. A third resident with flaccid neuropathic bladder and an SP catheter missed a scheduled urology appointment for an SP exchange, and the facility could not show any subsequent urology visits or SP catheter exchanges as ordered.
A resident with dementia and anxiety disorder, who was cognitively intact, threatened to physically harm another resident and was sent to the ER for evaluation. The DON acknowledged that this incident, which met the criteria for abuse reporting, was not reported to RIDOH as required by state law and facility policy.
Surveyors found that medications, including Trelegy Ellipta inhalers, Morphine Sulfate, and Lorazepam Intensol, were opened and not dated, and that Lorazepam was not refrigerated as required. Staff acknowledged these lapses in medication storage and labeling during interviews.
A resident with schizophrenia and moderate cognitive impairment, who was dependent on staff for supervision, successfully eloped from the facility after repeatedly expressing a desire to leave. Despite prior documentation of elopement risk and a physician order restricting leave, the facility did not reassess the resident's risk or update the care plan after the incident, and failed to complete required assessments or documentation.
A facility failed to notify a resident and their representative of a transfer or discharge, including the reasons for the move, in writing and in a language and manner they understand. The resident, with severe cognitive impairment and diagnoses of violent behaviors and dementia, was transferred to the hospital following an alleged interaction and subsequently discharged. The facility could not provide evidence of the required notification during a surveyor interview.
A facility failed to provide a resident or their representative with written notification of the bed-hold policy during a hospital transfer. The resident, with severe cognitive impairment and a history of violent behaviors, was transferred following an interaction with another resident. The facility's Administrator and DON could not provide evidence of the required notification.
A facility failed to allow a resident to return after hospitalization, violating bed-hold policy. The resident, admitted since 2019 with dementia and violent behaviors, was sent to the hospital for evaluation after an incident. Diagnosed with COVID-19 and a UTI, the resident was discharged without a 30-day notice. The Administrator and DON confirmed the decision not to allow the resident's return, despite the lack of documentation supporting this action.
The facility was found deficient in food safety standards as hot food items were served below the required temperature, and there was no evidence of reheating to meet policy standards. Additionally, a dietary aide was observed handling equipment in the kitchen without a hair restraint, contrary to facility policy. These issues were identified during a survey following a complaint about food temperatures and staff not wearing hairnets.
The facility failed to provide food and drinks at an appetizing temperature for several residents. A community complaint highlighted that hot food items were served cold. Residents reported ongoing issues with cold food, leading some to source meals externally or reheat them personally. A test tray confirmed that food temperatures were below the facility's policy requirements, with staff acknowledging the failure to maintain appropriate temperatures.
A resident with moderately impaired cognition allegedly touched another resident with severely impaired cognition inappropriately in a sunroom. The incident was witnessed by a cognitively intact resident who intervened and reported it to staff. The police were involved, and the resident was arrested for second-degree sexual assault.
Multiple residents experienced significant medication errors due to transcription mistakes and failure to follow physician orders. A resident with hypertension received Lasix despite an order to hold it, while another with gastric ulcer and diabetes received incorrect dosages of metronidazole and missed metformin doses. A resident with seizures missed doses of Valproic Acid, and a resident with heart failure received an incorrect total dose of Lasix. Staff acknowledged these errors during surveyor interviews.
A facility failed to create a comprehensive care plan for a resident identified as a smoker, despite assessments confirming nicotine dependence. The DON acknowledged the oversight during an interview.
A resident with severe morbid obesity and muscle weakness, dependent on staff for bathing, did not receive scheduled showers as ordered. Despite a care plan and physician's order for biweekly showers, staff interviews and surveyor observations revealed the resident had not been showered since May. The primary NA admitted to not providing showers, and facility management could not provide evidence of compliance with the care plan.
A facility failed to document the administration of oxygen for a resident with lung cancer and pneumonia, as required by their policy and professional standards. Despite physician orders specifying oxygen flow rates and conditions, records did not consistently reflect the amount of oxygen administered, even when the resident was observed on oxygen. The resident's physician expected proper documentation, highlighting a deficiency in respiratory care practices.
The facility failed to follow physician's orders for two residents. One resident did not receive scheduled laboratory tests for Valproic Acid levels, and another resident did not have daily weights recorded or a psychiatric consult completed. The DNS could not provide evidence of these actions during the surveyor interviews.
The facility failed to maintain accurate medical records for two residents. One resident did not receive a shower and wound treatment as documented, and another resident did not have a psychiatric evaluation as ordered. Staff interviews confirmed the inaccuracies in documentation.
Failure to Manage Escalating Aggression Leading to Resident-to-Resident Assault
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to protect a cognitively intact resident, Resident ID #1, from abuse by another resident with a known history of escalating aggression, Resident ID #2. Resident ID #1 was admitted in October 2025 with diagnoses including paranoid schizophrenia and adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood, and had a BIMS score of 14/15, indicating intact cognition. On 4/27/2026, progress notes documented that Resident ID #1 was on the receiving end of a physical altercation with another resident and was found with a deep bleeding abrasion to the left eyebrow. A subsequent nursing note described a new laceration to the left eyebrow measuring 0.5 cm by 2.0 cm by 0.1 cm, related to a resident-to-resident incident, for which wound closure strips were applied. Resident ID #1 requested police involvement and a police report, and refused transfer to the hospital for sutures. Resident ID #2 had been admitted in December 2024 with multiple psychiatric and behavioral diagnoses, including impulse disorder, adjustment disorder with mixed emotions and conduct, irritability and anger, restlessness and agitation, persistent mood disorder, and generalized anxiety. A Quarterly MDS showed a BIMS score of 13/15 and documented both physical and verbal behaviors during the look-back period. Progress notes over several months recorded a pattern of escalating aggressive and threatening behaviors: on 9/13/2025, Resident ID #2 threatened to slit another resident’s throat and made additional threats toward staff; on 11/7/2025, the resident was involved in a verbal dispute with raised voice, name-calling, and verbal threats; on 12/28/2025, after another resident struck Resident ID #2 with a helmet, Resident ID #2 was overheard threatening to kill that resident if touched again. On 2/21/2026, the on-call provider documented that Resident ID #2 attacked a roommate with a cane over TV volume and required ER transfer for psychiatric evaluation. Subsequent notes on 3/9/2026 and 4/10/2026 described the resident throwing poker chips on the floor, yelling and swearing at staff and residents, and throwing a lunch plate across the nurses’ station at a nursing assistant due to dissatisfaction with portion size. Despite this documented pattern, the care plan for Resident ID #2, dated 1/16/2025, only indicated a behavior problem of being verbally aggressive toward staff with resident-to-resident altercations on 12/28/2025, 2/21/2026, and 4/27/2026, and record review failed to show added interventions to mitigate the risk of physical aggression toward other residents after the 2/21/2026 cane attack and the object-throwing incidents on 3/9/2026 and 4/10/2026. A psychiatric evaluation on 4/23/2026 recommended starting trazodone 25 mg twice daily as needed for agitation, anxiety, and insomnia, with monitoring of response and tolerability. However, the physician’s order entered on 4/24/2026 specified trazodone 25 mg twice daily as needed only for insomnia, and record review did not show that agitation and anxiety were included as indications for use. During interviews, the RNP and the DON stated it was their expectation that agitation and anxiety would have been included in the trazodone order, and the DON was unable to provide evidence that the care plan had been updated with interventions to address Resident ID #2’s physically aggressive behaviors documented on 2/21/2026, 3/9/2026, and 4/10/2026. On 4/27/2026, the DON documented that Resident ID #2 was ambulating down the hall toward his/her room while Resident ID #1 was walking in the opposite direction, and the two residents began a verbal dispute. Before staff could intervene, Resident ID #2 used his/her cane to make contact with Resident ID #1, resulting in the eyebrow laceration that required steri-strips and ongoing wound treatment. A police incident report recorded that Resident ID #1 stated being struck with a walking cane, wanted to press charges, and that Resident ID #2 admitted to striking Resident ID #1, leading to an arrest on one count of felony assault with a dangerous weapon. The facility’s failure to assess, monitor, and implement effective interventions for Resident ID #2’s known and escalating aggressive behaviors, including failure to update the care plan after prior incidents and failure to fully implement psychiatric recommendations, resulted in this resident-to-resident altercation and injury, and the report states that this failure placed Resident ID #1 and other residents at risk of serious physical and psychosocial harm.
Failure to Implement Psychiatric Recommendations and Update Behavior Care Plan Leading to Resident Altercation
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to provide necessary behavioral health services and care planning for a resident with a documented history of psychiatric conditions and aggressive behaviors. The resident was admitted in December 2024 with diagnoses including impulse disorder, adjustment disorder with mixed emotions and conduct, irritability and anger, restlessness and agitation, persistent mood disorder, and generalized anxiety. A Quarterly MDS showed intact cognition with a BIMS score of 13/15 and documented physical and verbal behaviors during the look-back period. Over time, multiple behavioral incidents were recorded, including threats to slit another resident’s throat during a smoking session, verbal disputes with name-calling and threats, and a statement to another resident that if touched again the resident would be killed. Further documentation showed escalating behaviors, including an incident where the resident attacked a roommate with a cane over television volume and required ER transfer for psychiatric evaluation, throwing poker chips and yelling when not winning at Bingo, causing the roommate to avoid the shared bathroom due to inappropriate comments and frustration over the light being turned on at night, and throwing a lunch plate across the nurses’ station at a nursing assistant over portion size. The care plan, initiated in January 2025 for verbal aggression and resident-to-resident altercations, did not contain added interventions to address the resident’s physically aggressive behaviors toward others after the incidents on 2/21/2026, 3/9/2026, and 4/10/2026. The DNS later could not provide evidence that the care plan had been updated with interventions to mitigate the risk of these physically aggressive behaviors or to guide staff in ensuring the safety of other residents. On 4/23/2026, a psychiatric evaluation recommended starting trazodone 25 mg twice daily as needed for agitation, anxiety, and insomnia, with monitoring of response and tolerability. However, the physician’s order dated 4/24/2026 implemented trazodone 25 mg twice daily as needed for insomnia only, and the record lacked evidence that agitation and anxiety were included as indications for use as recommended by the consulting psychiatrist. Both the RNP and the DNS stated it was their expectation that the trazodone order would have included agitation and anxiety. Following this incomplete implementation of the psychiatric recommendation and the lack of updated behavioral interventions in the care plan, a resident-to-resident altercation occurred on 4/27/2026 in which the resident struck another resident with a cane, causing a laceration to the left eyebrow that required closure with steri-strips and ongoing wound treatment.
Failure to Provide Ordered Foley and Suprapubic Catheter Care
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to provide appropriate treatment and services related to urinary catheter care for three residents with indwelling catheters. One resident with a Foley catheter was admitted with urinary retention and neurogenic bladder and had physician orders for monthly Foley catheter changes and as-needed changes. Treatment Administration Records showed the monthly change order documented as not applicable or refused, and an order directing the primary team to determine if the Foley should be exchanged by urology for discolored, cloudy, and blood-tinged urine was signed as completed. However, there was no evidence that urology was contacted or that an appointment was scheduled, and the Foley catheter had not been exchanged since a hospital procedure months earlier. A community complaint later alleged that this resident arrived at the emergency room with a crusted Foley catheter, erosion of the urinary meatus, significant urinary retention, and foul-smelling urine. The deficiency also includes failure to follow physician orders for suprapubic (SP) catheter exchanges for a second resident with external genitalia, head, and neck malignancies. This resident had a care plan requiring SP catheter changes per physician orders and an order to call and set up an appointment with urology for an SP catheter exchange, which was documented as completed daily on the Treatment Administration Records. A continuity of care document showed that urology had exchanged the SP catheter and indicated that the next SP exchange was due in four weeks at the facility. Record review did not show any evidence that the SP catheter had been exchanged since that urology visit, despite the nurse practitioner’s expectation that the exchange would occur in the facility if not done by urology and the ADNS’s statement that nursing staff were competent to perform SP tube exchanges. For a third resident with a flaccid neuropathic bladder and an SP catheter, the care plan required SP catheter changes per physician orders, and an order specified that SP catheter exchanges were to be completed at urology. A continuity of care document showed that urology had exchanged the SP catheter and scheduled a follow-up appointment for an annual check-up and SP catheter exchange. The urology receptionist reported that the resident did not attend the scheduled follow-up appointment and had not been seen since the prior exchange. The ADNS was unable to provide evidence that the resident had any urology appointments after that date or that the SP catheter had been exchanged according to the physician’s order.
Failure to Timely Report Alleged Abuse to State Agency
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that an allegation of abuse was reported to the Rhode Island Department of Health (RIDOH) as required by state law and facility policy. Specifically, a resident with diagnoses including dementia and anxiety disorder, who was cognitively intact according to a recent assessment, threatened to physically harm another resident. This incident was documented in a progress note, and the resident was subsequently sent to the emergency room for evaluation and admitted. Despite the facility's policy requiring immediate reporting of suspected abuse to the Director of Nursing and RIDOH, the Director of Nursing acknowledged during a surveyor interview that the incident was not reported to RIDOH. The failure to report the allegation of abuse in a timely manner constituted noncompliance with both state regulations and the facility's own procedures.
Failure to Properly Store and Label Medications
Penalty
Summary
Surveyor observations revealed that drugs and biologicals were not stored and labeled according to professional standards in two of four medication carts inspected. Specifically, two Trelegy Ellipta inhalers were found opened and undated, despite manufacturer instructions requiring disposal six weeks after opening. Additionally, Morphine Sulfate and Lorazepam Intensol oral suspension were found opened and undated, with the Lorazepam not stored in the required refrigerated conditions. The pharmacy label and manufacturer instructions for these medications specify discard dates and storage requirements that were not followed. Staff present during these observations, including a Certified Medication Technician, an LPN, and an RN, acknowledged the deficiencies when interviewed by surveyors. The Director of Nursing Services also confirmed that medications should be dated when opened and that Lorazepam should be refrigerated. These findings were consistent with a community complaint alleging improper medication storage and administration.
Failure to Assess and Intervene After Resident Elopement
Penalty
Summary
A resident with a diagnosis of schizophrenia and moderately impaired cognition, as indicated by a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 9 out of 15, was admitted to the facility and required supervision for ambulation and dressing. Despite a physician order prohibiting the resident from taking a leave of absence, and documentation that the resident was an elopement risk and required supervision for smoking, the facility failed to reassess the resident's elopement risk after multiple documented behaviors indicating a desire to leave, including repeated requests to go home and expressing a strong desire to return home. The resident ultimately left the facility unsupervised and traveled to a previous residence, with the facility only learning of the elopement after being contacted by the other location. Following the resident's return, the facility did not perform an elopement assessment or develop a care plan with interventions to minimize further risk, as required by its own policy. Progress notes and staff interviews confirmed that no elopement evaluation or AMA discharge documentation was completed after the incident, and the Director of Nursing and Administrator acknowledged these omissions. The facility's failure to identify and address the resident's increased risk for elopement, and to implement appropriate interventions after the event, resulted in a deficiency related to inadequate supervision and accident prevention.
Failure to Notify Resident and Representative of Transfer or Discharge
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to notify a resident and their representative of a transfer or discharge, including the reasons for the move, in writing and in a language and manner they understand. This deficiency was identified for a resident who was transferred to the hospital and subsequently discharged from the facility. The resident, who had been admitted in July 2019 with diagnoses of violent behaviors and dementia, was involved in an alleged resident-to-resident interaction that led to their transfer to the emergency room on January 14, 2025. The record review did not reveal any evidence that the facility provided the required notification to the resident or their representative. During an interview with the Administrator and the Director of Nursing, they were unable to provide documentation that the necessary notifications were made. The resident's severe cognitive impairment, as indicated by a Quarterly Minimum Data Set Assessment, further underscores the importance of proper communication with their representative.
Failure to Provide Bed-Hold Policy Notification
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide written notification to a resident or their representative regarding the bed-hold policy during a transfer to the hospital. The deficiency was identified through a record review and staff interviews, which revealed that the facility did not provide the required written notice specifying the duration of the bed-hold policy at the time of the resident's transfer. This oversight was noted for a resident who was transferred to the emergency room following an alleged interaction with another resident. The resident, who was admitted to the facility in July 2019 with diagnoses of violent behaviors and dementia, was documented as having severe cognitive impairment. The complaint, submitted to the Rhode Island Department of Health, alleged that the resident was not allowed to return to the facility and did not receive a 30-day notice as required. During an interview, the facility's Administrator and Director of Nursing were unable to provide evidence of the required written notification to the resident or their representative regarding the bed-hold policy.
Facility Fails to Allow Resident Return Post-Hospitalization
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to permit a resident to return after a hospitalization, violating the bed-hold policy. The resident, who had been living in the facility since July 2019, was transferred to the hospital for a psychological evaluation following an alleged interaction with another resident. The hospital diagnosed the resident with COVID-19 and a urinary tract infection, which can cause agitation in the elderly. Despite these circumstances, the facility discharged the resident on the same day as the hospital transfer, without providing the required 30-day notice. Surveyor observations confirmed that the resident's room was vacant following the transfer. During interviews, the Administrator and the Director of Nurses admitted that they decided not to allow the resident to return to the facility. This decision was made despite the absence of documentation supporting the resident's discharge or any evidence that the resident was given the opportunity to return after hospitalization, as required by regulations.
Deficiencies in Food Safety and Hair Restraint Compliance
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to adhere to professional standards of food service safety during meal preparation, storage, and distribution. During a surveyor observation, it was noted that the temperatures of hot food items on the steam table were below the required holding temperature of 135 degrees Fahrenheit. Specifically, mashed potatoes were at 129.2 F, chicken at 128.3 F, and burger patties at 125.4 F. The facility's policy mandates that if food is below 135 F, it should be reheated to at least 165 F for a minimum of 15 seconds before serving. However, there was no evidence that these food items were reheated to meet the policy requirements. The Food Service Director acknowledged that the food should have been reheated according to the facility's policy. Additionally, the facility did not comply with the Rhode Island Food Code regarding the use of hair restraints in the kitchen. During an observation, a dietary aide was seen handling equipment in the main kitchen without wearing a hair restraint, which is against the facility's policy. The Food Service Director confirmed that all staff are expected to wear hair restraints while working in the kitchen. These deficiencies were identified during a survey following a community-reported complaint about food being served at unappetizing temperatures and staff not wearing hairnets.
Failure to Maintain Appropriate Food Temperatures
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide food and drinks that are palatable, attractive, and at an appetizing temperature for four out of five residents reviewed. A community complaint was submitted to the Rhode Island Department of Health, alleging that hot food items were being served cold and at an unappetizing temperature. The facility's policy requires hot foods on room trays to be at 120°F or greater to promote palatability. However, surveyor interviews with residents revealed ongoing issues with cold food. Resident ID #2, admitted in September 2021 with type II diabetes mellitus, reported that hot food items have always been cold since admission. Resident ID #3, admitted in October 2024 with hypertension, stated that the food served within the last week was cold and not palatable, leading to sourcing meals from outside the facility. Resident ID #4, readmitted in August 2024 with depression, mentioned having to microwave food daily due to it being served cold. Resident ID #5, admitted in September 2024 with gastro-esophageal reflux disease, refused to eat breakfast because it was not hot and had to heat the food personally. A test tray ordered by the Unit Manager, Staff A, showed that the food temperatures were below the facility's policy requirements. The mashed potatoes were at 112.7°F, chicken at 106.1°F, and vegetables at 117.8°F. Staff A acknowledged that the food failed to hold the temperature from the steamer and expected temperatures closer to 135°F. The Food Service Director also expected the food to be at least 120°F or higher, per the facility policy. These findings indicate a failure to maintain appropriate food temperatures, leading to dissatisfaction among residents and non-compliance with the facility's policy on food service temperatures.
Failure to Protect Residents from Abuse
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to protect a resident's right to be free from abuse, as evidenced by an incident involving two residents. Resident ID #1 reported that Resident ID #2 entered their room and joined them in bed without consent. Further allegations were made that Resident ID #2 sat on Resident ID #1's face while fully clothed, leading Resident ID #1 to retaliate by touching Resident ID #2's genitals. Resident ID #1 was admitted with mild neurocognitive disorder and had a BIMS score indicating moderately impaired cognition. Resident ID #2, with a history of dementia and schizophrenia, had a BIMS score indicating severely impaired cognition, making it difficult for surveyors to interview them. The incident was witnessed by another resident, Resident ID #4, who reported seeing Resident ID #1 touch Resident ID #2's thigh and move their hand towards the upper thigh in the sunroom. Resident ID #4, who had no cognitive impairments, intervened and reported the incident to the facility staff. The police were involved, and Resident ID #1 was arrested for second-degree sexual assault. The facility's failure to prevent this incident and protect the residents from abuse constitutes a deficiency in their care standards.
Medication Errors Affect Multiple Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that residents were free from significant medication errors, affecting four out of nine residents reviewed. Resident ID #111, who was admitted with hypertension and acute kidney failure, received Lasix despite an order to hold the medication for three days due to lab results. The medication was administered on three consecutive days in error. Resident ID #136, with a history of gastric ulcer and diabetes mellitus, received an incorrect dosage and frequency of metronidazole due to a transcription error, and missed 34 doses of metformin because the order was not transcribed. The errors were acknowledged by the staff involved during surveyor interviews. Resident ID #162, admitted with seizures, did not receive Valproic Acid on two occasions, and the provider was not notified of the missed doses. Staff acknowledged the oversight during interviews. Resident ID #186, with abnormal blood chemistry and heart failure, received an incorrect total dose of Lasix due to a failure to hold the 20 mg dose as ordered and an error in administering both 20 mg and 40 mg doses on the same day. The staff involved confirmed the administration errors during surveyor interviews, and the Director of Nursing Services was unable to provide evidence that the Lasix order was followed correctly.
Failure to Develop Comprehensive Smoking Care Plan
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for a resident identified as a smoker. The resident was admitted to the facility in May 2024 with a diagnosis that included nicotine dependence. A smoking assessment was completed upon both admission and re-admission, indicating the resident is a smoker. However, the facility did not create a comprehensive care plan for smoking as required by their policy. During an interview, the Director of Nursing Services acknowledged the resident's smoking status and the absence of a comprehensive care plan addressing this issue.
Failure to Provide Scheduled Showers to Dependent Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide necessary services to a resident who was unable to carry out activities of daily living, specifically regarding scheduled showers. The resident, admitted in June 2023 with severe morbid obesity and generalized muscle weakness, was dependent on staff assistance for bathing and showering. A care plan dated January 2024 confirmed the resident's dependency on staff for self-care and mobility, including showers. A physician's order from July 2024 specified biweekly showers on Mondays and Thursdays during the day shift. However, surveyor observations on July 24 and 25, 2024, noted a strong odor of urine in the resident's room, and the resident reported not having received a shower since moving to the unit in May 2024. Interviews with staff revealed further deficiencies in care. The resident's primary Nursing Assistant (NA), Staff B, admitted to not providing the resident with a shower since May 2024, despite being assigned to the resident on specific dates when showers were ordered. Staff B also acknowledged that the shower chair was not broken, contradicting the reason given to the resident for not receiving showers. Additionally, the unit manager, an LPN, and the Director of Nursing Services were unable to provide evidence that the resident received showers as ordered, indicating a systemic failure in adhering to the care plan and physician's orders for the resident's hygiene needs.
Failure to Document Oxygen Administration
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide respiratory care consistent with professional standards of practice for a resident with a history of lung cancer, shortness of breath, and pneumonia. The deficiency was identified through surveyor observation, record review, and staff interviews. According to the facility's policy and the Lippincott Manual of Nursing Practice, documentation of oxygen administration should include the date, time, amount, and method of administration, as well as the resident's condition before and after therapy. However, the facility's records did not consistently document the amount of oxygen administered to the resident on several occasions, despite the resident being observed on oxygen during surveyor visits. The resident had a physician's order for oxygen administration, specifying a flow rate of 2-4 liters via nasal cannula, with instructions to titrate as needed to maintain pulse oximetry levels above 88% on room air. Despite these orders, the facility's Treatment Administration Record for July 2024 failed to document the administration of oxygen on specific dates, as required by the facility's policy. During an interview, the resident's physician expressed the expectation that staff should document the date, time, and amount of oxygen administered each time it is given. This lack of documentation represents a failure to adhere to the facility's policy and professional standards of practice for respiratory care.
Failure to Follow Physician's Orders for Laboratory Tests and Consults
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that services provided met professional standards of practice by not following physician's orders for two residents. Resident ID #162, who was admitted with a seizure disorder, had a physician's order for Valproic Acid and required bloodwork, including a comprehensive metabolic panel (CMP) and Valproic Acid level, every six months starting on 6/12/2024. However, the laboratory results for these tests were not obtained as ordered, and the Director of Nursing Services (DNS) could not provide evidence of the completed laboratory work during the surveyor interview. Resident ID #241, admitted with cirrhosis of the liver, ascites, and a history of depression, had a physician's order for daily weights and a psychiatric consult. The resident's weights were not recorded on two specific dates, and there was no evidence that the psychiatric consult was completed. The DNS acknowledged the failure to obtain daily weights and could not provide evidence of the psychiatric evaluation during the surveyor interview. The resident's physician expressed the need for a psychiatric evaluation before starting any medications.
Inaccurate Medical Record Documentation for Resident Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain accurate medical records in accordance with professional standards for two residents. For Resident ID #111, discrepancies were found in the documentation of shower schedules and wound treatment. The resident was admitted with diagnoses including morbid obesity and generalized muscle weakness. The physician's orders specified a weekly shower schedule and the application of a skin protectant cream to a wound on the left posterior thigh. However, the Nursing Assistant assignment log showed a different shower schedule, and the Treatment Administration Record inaccurately indicated that the resident received a shower and wound treatment on a specific date. Interviews with the Nursing Assistant and Registered Nurse involved confirmed that the documented care was not provided. For Resident ID #241, the facility failed to provide evidence of a psychiatric evaluation as ordered. The resident, admitted with cirrhosis of the liver, ascites, and a history of depression, had a physician's order for a psychiatric consultation. Although a form indicated that the psychiatric provider signed off on completing the consult, there was no evidence that the evaluation occurred. An interview with the Director of Nursing Services revealed the absence of documentation to support that the psychiatric evaluation was conducted, and subsequent communication with the psychiatric provider confirmed that the evaluation was not completed.
What surveyors are citing around you — mapped
All 10 risk areas, ranked with evidence
Repeat citations, what's rising near you, and quality measures — ranked so department heads know exactly where to look first.
Illustrative
What surveyors actually found near you
We read the 510 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 21 immediate-jeopardy cases — and tell you exactly what happened, in plain English, matched to your record.
Resident with a documented fall history left unattended on the patio; found on the ground with a hip fracture.
Walk-in cooler logs missing for 12 days; expired supplements in the medication room fridge.
Illustrative
A prioritized, do-first checklist
Every risk area becomes concrete audit steps drawn from real citations at facilities like yours — run them this week, before your window opens.
Illustrative
Risk indicators are statistical estimates from public CMS data — not predictions, findings, or compliance advice.
Nursing homes near Providence
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Elmhurst Rehabilitation And Healthcare Center | 0.5 mi | — | 10 | 1 |
| Golden Crest Nursing Centre | 1.4 mi | — | 8 | 0 |
| Adviniacare Providence Dodge Rehab Center, Llc | 2 mi | — | 4 | 0 |
| Adviniacare Summit Commons, Llc | 2 mi | — | 15 | 2 |
| Jeanne Jugan Residence | 2.2 mi | — | 3 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Berkshire Place.
100% money-back within 48 hours.
Trusted data, never guesswork. Every citation, penalty, rating and Plan of Correction on this page is sourced from public CMS records (latest release August 2026) and official state health department websites.