Failure to Recognize and Properly Investigate Sexual Abuse of a Minor by an Adult Resident
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to recognize, report, and investigate non-consensual sexual acts between a minor resident and an adult resident as sexual abuse, in accordance with its own policies and regulatory requirements. A minor resident with traumatic brain injury, ADHD, anxiety, and depression was admitted with a care plan indicating impaired cognitive function or thought process due to recent hospitalization, and requiring supervision/assistance with all decision making, with all consents made by a legal guardian/parent. Despite a BIMS score of 15 and documentation of being alert and oriented, the resident’s status as a minor and need for supervision and guardian consent were known to the facility. Staff had observed the minor and an adult resident spending significant time together prior to the incident, and staff had warned the adult resident that the other resident was a minor. The unit manager reported that there was concern among staff that something inappropriate might occur between the two residents, and the legal guardian was notified in advance that the minor was spending time with another resident and had been instructed to stay in public areas. On the night of the incident, an LPN from another unit entered a resident’s room and observed the adult resident on her knees in front of the minor resident, who was standing with his pants down in the bathroom. The LPN reported that it appeared the adult resident was performing oral sex on the minor, and the residents were separated and the DON was notified. Another LPN corroborated that the nurse who discovered the incident described finding the two residents in the bathroom in this position, and that the room’s assigned resident was upset and unaware of what was happening in his bathroom. The minor later told staff that the adult resident had performed oral sex on him, and both residents separately acknowledged a sexual encounter, describing it as consensual and initiated by the minor. The police report classified the event as sexual assault of a minor, with the adult resident reporting that she performed oral sex on the minor for approximately two minutes after he asked for it, and acknowledging that she knew his age. The police report documented the offense as completed statutory rape and sexual conduct with a minor. Despite this information, the facility’s internal 5-day investigation report concluded that the incident was between two consenting individuals and that abuse could not be substantiated. The facility’s reports to the State Agency did not identify the younger resident as a minor, even though the facility knew he was under 18 and that healthcare consents were obtained from his legal guardian. The investigation did not include an interview or written statement from the nurse who discovered the incident, did not interview the resident whose room and bathroom were used, and did not document what interviewed residents had seen or heard. The facility also did not assess or monitor other residents, including other minors, for potential risk or impact, and there was no evidence of protective interventions being implemented on the date the incident occurred. The incident was reported to police nearly 24 hours after it occurred, and there was no evidence that the facility reported the incident to the Department of Child Services/Child Protective Services at the time, despite later acknowledgment by the former DON that CPS should have been notified as soon as possible. The facility’s actions and omissions were inconsistent with its abuse prevention policy, which required prompt identification of sexual abuse, immediate reporting to appropriate agencies, and thorough investigation including interviews with all relevant witnesses and review of all circumstances surrounding the event. Interviews with facility leadership and staff further demonstrated misunderstanding and misapplication of abuse definitions and consent standards as they relate to minors. The former DON stated that any alert and oriented resident, including minors, could consent to sexual activity with an adult and initially did not consider the incident to be sexual abuse because she believed it was not unwanted, although she later acknowledged that a minor cannot give consent for sexual activity and that the incident should have been reported to CPS. The former administrator stated that he viewed the incident as a crime involving an adult and a minor but did not know if it was sexual abuse. In contrast, the current DON and current administrator described sexual abuse and statutory rape as involving a minor who cannot legally consent and emphasized that it is not acceptable for an adult to sexually touch a minor. The social services supervisor and unit manager also stated that it was inappropriate and illegal for an adult resident and a pediatric/minor resident to have a sexual relationship, and that a child in the facility could not consent to sex with an adult. Despite these understandings, at the time of the incident the facility failed to apply these principles, failed to identify the event as sexual abuse of a minor, and failed to conduct and document a thorough investigation and timely reporting as required by policy and law. The APS investigative report later verified neglect of a vulnerable adult (the adult resident with serious mental illness) and confirmed that the sexual assault occurred. The DCS child safety specialist and the minor’s legal guardian both reported that the incident and its aftermath had a negative psychosocial effect on the minor. Staff interviews indicated that prior to the incident the minor was not directly supervised and was allowed to roam the facility freely, despite his minor status and TBI-related behaviors, and the social services supervisor was unsure what supervision measures were in place for pediatric/minor residents. These facts, combined with the facility’s failure to recognize the incident as sexual abuse, failure to identify and report the minor’s status in regulatory reports, failure to notify child protective authorities at the time, and failure to conduct a comprehensive investigation with all relevant witnesses and residents, formed the basis of the cited deficiency for not implementing policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft, specifically in relation to preventing and responding to sexual abuse of a minor by an adult resident.
Penalty
Resources
Below are regulatory guidelines relevant to this citation:
A resident with moderately impaired cognition and limited English proficiency sustained bilateral wrist discoloration and swelling during ADL care provided by a CNA while resisting care. Staff documentation and witness statements described the resident bumping or hitting her wrists on a wheelchair during transfer, but the CNA later stated he did not know how the injury occurred. The resident’s family reported that the resident said a large male staff member grabbed and held her hands while trying to force a nightgown change, and also reported a second, similar wrist injury incident to facility staff and APS. Despite a written abuse policy requiring immediate investigation, interviews of the alleged victim, alleged perpetrator, and witnesses, and protective measures, the facility did not report the incident as abuse or injury of unknown origin, did not interview the resident or other residents, and limited its inquiry to two staff members, resulting in a cited Immediate Jeopardy deficiency for failure to prevent and investigate potential abuse.
The facility failed to follow its abuse, neglect, and exploitation policy by not ensuring that a CNA completed required annual abuse-prevention and related trainings. Although the CNA reported being current on all yearly training, a review of her transcript showed that assigned courses on cultural competence, abuse/neglect/exploitation, and abuse/neglect/exploitation with HIPAA content were overdue past their required completion date. The administrator confirmed that these were mandatory annual trainings. Review of the written policy showed that existing staff must receive annual education on preventing, identifying, recognizing, and reporting abuse, neglect, exploitation, and misappropriation of resident property, as well as on resident behaviors that may increase risk, but this requirement was not met for this CNA.
The facility failed to follow its abuse reporting policy when an allegation that a resident had been roughly handled by a third-shift CNA was not immediately reported to the Administrator/Abuse Coordinator. One resident told his roommate he had been treated roughly and mishandled with a urinal; the upset roommate then reported this to a CNA, who in turn informed an LPN. The CNA and LPN acknowledged awareness of a complaint involving third-shift staff but did not directly notify the Administrator, and Social Services was only told that the resident had a complaint, without mention of abuse. Social Services made unsuccessful attempts to speak with the resident and did not learn the concern involved abuse until the resident’s son later stated it was "elder abuse." The Administrator reported first learning of the allegation hours after staff initially became aware, and the resident stated no one from the facility had come to talk with him about what occurred.
The facility failed to follow its abuse prevention policy when a cognitively intact, independent resident alleged that a CNA struck her with a garbage bag after a dispute over dishes left in a shared bathroom, an event that was witnessed by another cognitively intact, independent resident with psychiatric diagnoses. The Administrator did not initially consider the event to meet the definition of abuse, did not promptly report it to the state agency, did not initiate a timely internal investigation, and allowed the CNA to continue working, despite a written policy requiring prompt reporting, investigation, and protection of residents during abuse investigations.
The facility failed to follow its abuse and electronic monitoring policies by not properly identifying, documenting, or investigating multiple allegations of abuse, neglect, and misappropriation involving a resident with dementia and chronic respiratory failure. Over several weeks, the resident’s daughter reported that an LPN intimidated the resident, administered Tramadol doses too close together, failed to provide ordered medications, ignored incontinence care requests, and publicly disparaged the resident, while a CNA and another aide allegedly yelled at the resident, disrespected her belongings, and spoke to her in a demeaning manner. The daughter also reported missing personal items, including socks, a camera, and an SD card that she said contained video of staff screaming at the resident. Despite these detailed complaints, facility leadership denied knowledge of the allegations, the concern log contained no entries for the resident, and the only self-reported incident was a vague mistreatment report that lacked specific interviews with the daughter, relied on a generic questionnaire for the resident, and did not include any documented attempt to obtain or review camera footage.
Facility staff did not complete required Criminal Background Checks (CBCs) for three CNAs before they began working with residents, despite policies requiring background and criminal conviction checks for all direct-access employees. Review of personnel files showed no documentation that CBCs were requested or obtained for these CNAs. The administrator reported relying on verification through the Family Care Safety Registry (FCSR) and, when not registered, on requests to an external association for background checks, and acknowledged not requesting CBCs from the state highway patrol since assuming responsibility for this process.
Failure to Implement Abuse Policy and Investigate Resident Wrist Injuries
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to implement its abuse policy and to ensure a resident’s safety following an injury sustained during ADL care by a CNA, and the failure to investigate to rule out abuse. The resident, identified as R94, was admitted with diagnoses including altered mental status and had a BIMS score of 11/15, indicating moderately impaired cognition. Her preferred language was Korean. Her care plan, initiated months before the incident, addressed discoloration but was not updated after she sustained injuries to her wrist on 03/20/25. The facility did not report the incident to the state survey agency, and the CEO confirmed there was no investigation for the 03/20/25 incident, only a grievance form. On 03/20/25, an incident report documented that CNA2 informed RN1 that the resident developed discoloration and swelling of both wrists during ADL care when changing clothes, while the resident was resisting care. The report stated that the resident bumped her wrists against the wheelchair during transfer, and that CNA2 was removed from the assignment and educated to stop providing care if a resident resists. Employee witness statements from RN1 and CNA2 described the resident resisting care and bumping or hitting her wrists on the wheelchair, with RN1 noting that the resident was unable to communicate coherent English when questioned. CNA3’s statement only indicated that she was asked to assist, found the resident agitated, and that the nurse assessed and notified others. A nurse’s note by RN1 documented bilateral wrist discoloration and swelling after an “accident” during clothes changing while the resident was resisting, and that ice was applied. In a later interview, CNA2 stated he attempted to transfer the resident from the wheelchair to bed after toileting, that she resisted by lifting her arms, and that he did not know how the injury occurred. He confirmed the injury was not present before he attempted the transfer and that he remained assigned to the resident for the rest of the shift. The resident’s family member reported that the resident, who did not speak English, told her that during the 03/20/25 incident she refused to be changed into a nightgown and staff grabbed her hand and tried to force her, describing the staff as a big Black man. The family member also reported a second, similar wrist injury incident with a big Black male staff member and stated she reported these to facility staff and APS. The Social Service Director acknowledged that she did not interview the resident or other residents or complete a trauma assessment regarding the 03/20/25 allegation, despite stating that such steps were part of the usual abuse investigation process. The Administrator, who was the DON at the time, stated that the incident was not reported as abuse or injury of unknown origin because CNA2 self-reported that the injury occurred during care and denied abuse, and that only CNA2 and RN1 were interviewed. This was inconsistent with the facility’s written abuse policy, which required immediate investigation, interviews of all involved persons including the alleged victim and witnesses, and measures to protect residents from harm during and after the investigation. The facility’s abuse, neglect, and exploitation policy required an immediate investigation when there was suspicion or reports of abuse, including identifying and interviewing the alleged victim, alleged perpetrator, witnesses, and others with knowledge, and ensuring residents were protected from physical and psychosocial harm during and after the investigation. Examples in the policy included responding immediately to protect the alleged victim, examining the alleged victim for signs of injury, and making room or staffing changes if necessary to protect residents from the alleged perpetrator. Despite this, the Social Service Director did not conduct resident or collateral interviews or trauma assessments, and the Administrator confirmed that the facility limited its inquiry to CNA2 and RN1 and did not treat the event as an injury of unknown origin or an abuse allegation. The failure to follow these procedures and to ensure the resident’s protection and a thorough investigation led to the cited deficiency under 42 CFR §483.12 Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation, with Immediate Jeopardy identified at a scope and severity level J.
Failure to Ensure Completion of Required Annual Abuse-Prevention Training
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to implement its abuse, neglect, and exploitation policy by not ensuring that one CNA received required annual abuse-related training. During an interview, CNA #3 stated that she was current on all required yearly training. However, a review of her annual training transcript showed that multiple assigned trainings, including "Cultural Competence Inservice," "Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation," and "Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation HIPAA for Long-Term Care Employees," were overdue. These trainings had been assigned on February 2, 2026, with a completion due date of February 28, 2026, but remained incomplete as of the survey date. The administrator confirmed that the records reviewed were the yearly training records and stated that employees were required to complete these courses annually and by the due date. A review of the facility’s written policy titled "Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation" showed that new employees must be educated on abuse, neglect, exploitation, and misappropriation of resident property during orientation, and existing staff must receive annual education through planned in-services and as needed. The policy specified that training topics must include prohibiting and preventing all forms of abuse, neglect, exploitation, and misappropriation; identifying and recognizing signs and indicators of these issues; and understanding reporting processes and resident behavioral symptoms that may increase risk. In a meeting with the DON, administrator, and regional director of clinical services, the DON stated she was a new hire and that the training should have been completed, and no additional information was provided.
Failure to Immediately Report and Investigate Alleged Abuse
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to follow its Abuse Prohibition and Reporting policy by not immediately reporting an allegation of abuse involving one resident (R1) to the Abuse Coordinator/Administrator. The facility’s written policy requires any employee or agent who becomes aware of alleged abuse or neglect to immediately report the matter to the Administrator or designee, and specifies that staff must report whenever they hear the word "abuse" or suspect abuse. R1’s face sheet shows he was admitted with diagnoses including acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, peripheral vascular disease, generalized anxiety disorder, and benign prostatic hyperplasia. Despite this policy, multiple staff members became aware that R1 allegedly experienced rough handling by a third-shift CNA but did not promptly notify the Administrator as required. On the morning of 4/15/26, R2 reported to a CNA (V8) that he believed his roommate, R1, had been abused by a third-shift CNA, describing that there were two CNAs, one nice and one not, and that the rough CNA had been very rough with R1 and did something involving a urinal. V8 acknowledged that R2 appeared upset and that she understood this as a concern about possible abuse of R1 by third shift. V8 then reported the concern to an LPN (V6) and accompanied her to the residents’ room. V6 spoke briefly with R1, who stated he had a complaint about a third-shift CNA, and V6 told him she would get Social Services so he would not have to repeat himself. V8 stated she did not know who the Abuse Coordinator was and did not report the allegation to the Administrator. V6 stated she contacted Social Services (V5) only to report that R1 had a complaint, without specifying that it involved alleged abuse. Social Services (V5) reported being told only that R1 had a complaint and made two unsuccessful attempts to speak with him before R1’s son (V15) was brought to her office later that afternoon. V5 stated that the first time she became aware that the issue involved abuse was when V15 came in and stated, "This is Elder Abuse." V6 similarly stated she did not realize it was an abuse allegation until V15 used the term "elder abuse" when she took him to Social Services. The Administrator (V1), who is the Abuse Coordinator, reported that she did not become aware of the allegation until between 3:00 and 4:00 p.m. that day, despite the policy requiring immediate reporting to her when abuse is suspected. R1 stated that no one from the facility had come to talk to him about what occurred, although they had spoken with his son and his roommate. R1’s son also reported that he was not notified by the facility of the abuse allegation and instead learned of it from R1 and R2, and that when police later interviewed R1 and R2, R2 told the police he had reported the incident to the Administrator the morning it occurred. These interviews and record reviews demonstrate that the facility did not implement its abuse reporting procedures as written for this allegation involving R1.
Failure to Implement Abuse Reporting and Investigation Policy After Alleged Staff-to-Resident Abuse
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to implement its abuse prevention program policy related to prohibiting and preventing abuse, investigating allegations, protecting residents during investigations, and reporting abuse. One cognitively intact resident (R4), who has diagnoses including depression, COPD, and GERD and is independent in daily activities, reported that after returning from dinner she was told by her roommate that a CNA (V26) had taken dishes she left on the shared bathroom sink. When R4 confronted the CNA, she stated the CNA hit her with a garbage bag. R4 reported that she called the police, who came to the facility, and that the next day the Administrator (V1) spoke with her but did not take action regarding the allegation. Another cognitively intact resident (R9), with diagnoses including bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, major depressive disorder, and anxiety disorder and who is also independent in activities of daily living, stated she witnessed the CNA hitting R4 with a garbage bag. Despite these allegations and the facility’s written Abuse Prevention Program policy, the Administrator/Abuse Coordinator (V1) acknowledged that he did not report the incident to the state agency at the time because he did not believe it met the facility’s definition of abuse. The incident was not reported to the Illinois Department of Public Health until months later, and no internal investigation was initiated at the time of the allegation. V1 further acknowledged that the CNA continued to work after the allegation. The DON (V2) and ADON (V3) later stated that the facility had overlooked the incident and that the abuse allegation should have been addressed in a timely manner. The facility’s policy, revised 01/2019, states that the facility will not tolerate incidents of abuse and that the policy defines how investigations of abuse allegations will be conducted and outlines the process of reporting, investigating, and reaching conclusions on allegations, which was not followed in this case.
Failure to Investigate and Respond to Repeated Abuse, Neglect, and Misappropriation Allegations
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to follow its own policies for promptly identifying, reporting, and investigating allegations of abuse, neglect, and misappropriation involving a resident. The resident, who had dementia, anxiety disorder, chronic respiratory failure, and was assessed as having mild or no cognitive impairment, had no documented abuse or misappropriation allegations in her progress notes for 2026 despite multiple concerns raised externally. The Ohio Department of Health (ODH) website showed only one self-reported incident (SRI) related to this resident within the prior six months, dated 03/09/26, for alleged neglect and mistreatment by an LPN and a CNA, even though numerous additional allegations had been communicated by the resident’s daughter. Record review of emails from the resident’s daughter to facility staff and ODH showed repeated allegations over several weeks, including that an LPN administered Tramadol doses too close together, displayed animosity, intimidated the resident, failed to provide ordered medications, falsely documented refusals, and ignored calls for incontinence care after turning off the call light. Additional emails alleged that a CNA disrespected the resident’s belongings and spoke to her in a demeaning manner, that an unidentified aide yelled at the resident, and that personal items such as cabin socks were stolen. The daughter also reported a missing camera and SD card to the ombudsman, and later alleged that the SD card containing footage of staff screaming at the resident had been stolen. Despite these detailed complaints, the Administrator, DON, ADON, and Regional Nurse all denied knowledge of the abuse, neglect, and misappropriation allegations contained in the emails. The facility’s handling of the one documented SRI did not follow its abuse policy requirements for a focused investigation. The SRI described staff speaking to the resident in a loud, abrasive manner and referenced mistreatment concerns but lacked specifics, did not include an interview or attempted interview with the daughter, and documented only a generic questionnaire-style interview with the resident in which pre-written answers were circled indicating she felt safe and had no concerns. There was no documented attempt to obtain footage from the monitoring camera that had been in the resident’s room until it was removed by the facility. A call log later produced by the facility showed several calls to and from the daughter but contained no record of the content or results of those calls. The resident concern log for the past year contained no entries regarding this resident, and the Administrator stated that the resident did not know what he was talking about during the SRI interview and that the daughter did not respond to his attempts to reach her, further underscoring the lack of documented, policy-compliant investigation and response to the reported allegations.
Failure to Complete Required Criminal Background Checks for Direct-Care Staff
Penalty
Summary
Facility staff failed to complete required Criminal Background Checks (CBCs) for three CNAs prior to their employment, contrary to Missouri DHSS requirements and the facility’s own policies. Record review showed that the Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation policy required screening potential employees for a history of abuse, neglect, exploitation, or misappropriation of resident property, with documentation maintained as proof of screening. The Background Screening Investigations policy further required that background and criminal conviction checks, including fingerprinting as required by state law, be initiated within two days of an employment offer and completed prior to employment for all applicants with direct access to residents. Review of personnel files revealed that CNA A, CNA B, and CNA C, each hired on different dates, had no documentation that a CBC was requested or received. During an interview, the administrator stated he/she was responsible for requesting CBCs on all potential staff prior to hire and explained that he/she typically verified whether applicants were registered with the Family Care Safety Registry (FCSR). If applicants were registered with the FCSR, the administrator did not request a CBC, and if they were not, he/she sent a request to the Missouri Association of Nursing Home Administrators (MANHA) for a background check. The administrator also stated that he/she had not requested a CBC from the Missouri State Highway Patrol (MSHP) since assuming responsibility for employee CBCs in April 2025.
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.
