Isles Of Boynton Nursing And Rehab Center
Inspection history, citations, penalties and survey trends for this long-term care facility in Boynton Beach, Florida.
- Location
- 3001 South Congress Avenue, Boynton Beach, Florida 33426
- CMS Provider Number
- 105496
- Inspections on file
- 26
- Latest survey
- February 12, 2026
- Citations (last 12 mo.)
- 9
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Isles Of Boynton Nursing And Rehab Center during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident with multiple medical conditions, including a fracture, pressure ulcer, acute kidney failure, and type 2 DM, had a physician order for ascorbic acid 500 mg PO daily for wound healing. During a med pass, an LPN prepared Saccharomyces boulardii 500 mg, a probiotic for which there was no order, intending to administer it to the resident until a surveyor intervened. The LPN reported she believed ascorbic acid and Saccharomyces boulardii were the same medication, later confirming that ascorbic acid is Vitamin C and acknowledging it was not the ordered drug, demonstrating failure to follow the facility’s medication administration policy and the right medication standard.
Improper wound care technique during pressure ulcer treatment: A resident with quadriplegia, chronic osteomyelitis, severe malnutrition, and multiple pressure ulcers received wound care that did not follow the ordered treatment. The wound care RN cleansed the wound beds and surrounding skin with Dakin’s solution, reused the same tongue depressor across all 3 wounds to apply silver gel, applied gel to peri-wound skin, and placed one long Dakin’s-soaked gauze strip across healthy skin between the wounds. The wound care NP stated the peri-wound should not have been cleansed with Dakin’s, the silver gel should not have been applied to peri-wound skin, and the gauze should have been limited to each wound bed.
Failure to secure an indwelling urinary catheter: A resident with quadriplegia, chronic osteomyelitis, pressure ulcer, severe protein-calorie malnutrition, major depressive disorder, and moderate cognitive impairment had an order for catheter anchor/securement device care. During wound care observation, the catheter was found not anchored, and a CNA then removed the adhesive backing and secured the catheter tubing to the resident's upper thigh after noticing it was not attached.
A resident with a midline for IV fluids had a dirty dressing with dried blood under it, and the dressing had been in place longer than the facility’s weekly change interval. The resident said no one had changed the dressing since insertion and that the IV hurt and pinched her skin. Staff, including LPNs, an RN, the ADON, and the DON, stated IV dressings for PICCs and midlines should be changed weekly and as needed, and they agreed the dressing was bloody, dirty, and needed to be changed. The record also lacked IV monitoring orders and an IV care plan.
Failure to perform ordered trach care occurred when an LPN completed tracheostomy care for a resident with severe cognitive impairment, anoxic brain damage, and acute respiratory failure without doing a respiratory assessment or suctioning despite visible secretions and a mucus plug. The resident had active orders for oxygen via trach collar, trach care, and suctioning every shift and as needed, and the LPN stated she was nervous and did not suction even though she knew she should have.
Unauthorized access and improper medication storage were observed when a WCRN gave treatment cart keys to a CNA who was not authorized to access medications, an LPN left a med cart unlocked and unattended during med pass, and a resident had multiple OTC meds stored at the bedside without an order or self-administration assessment. The resident had diagnoses including a left talus fracture, pressure ulcer, AKI, and DM2, and had a BIMS score of 15.
Failure to Serve Ground Meats per Diet Order: A resident with dementia, cerebral atherosclerosis, sarcopenia, and hospice services had a diet order for regular texture foods with ground meats added for ease of chewing, but the facility's meal tickets did not reflect the ground meat order. During observations, the resident was served regular texture beef pot pie and later whole sausage patties instead of ground meats, and staff relied on the meal ticket rather than the EMR diet order.
Three discharged residents did not receive timely refunds for overpaid amounts, as confirmed by the facility's Aging Report and interviews with the BOM. Despite repeated inquiries from a resident's family and internal awareness of the outstanding balances, the refunds were not processed within the required timeframe.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment and a history of exit-seeking behavior was inadequately supervised, leading to a fall from a window. Despite previous incidents of wandering and exit-seeking, the resident was not placed on one-to-one observation after being moved to a secured floor. Staff failed to communicate and document the resident's behavior, resulting in the resident removing a window panel and falling 20 feet, sustaining serious injuries.
A resident with a history of traumatic brain injury and exit-seeking behavior fell from a second-floor window due to inadequate supervision. Despite being moved to a secured floor, the resident was not placed on one-to-one observation, leading to the incident. Staff failed to recognize exit-seeking behavior and did not document or communicate the resident's needs effectively.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment and dependency on staff for daily activities suffered a knee fracture, which was not investigated by the facility. Despite the resident's complaint of knee pain and subsequent positive X-ray results, the incident was not documented in the facility's adverse and incident log. The ADON suggested osteoporosis as a cause but lacked documentation, and the injury was not investigated as per policy.
The facility did not conduct Level I PASARR screenings for two residents with mental disorders or intellectual disabilities, as required for those needing extended care. One resident had severe cognitive impairment, and another had a psychotic disorder, yet neither had the necessary preadmission screening. The absence of these screenings was confirmed by facility staff.
A resident experienced itching and burning in her genitals after a urinary catheter change, which she believed to be a yeast infection. Despite informing the nurse and being promised treatment, she did not receive any medication and resorted to using an antibiotic cream prescribed for her toe. There was no documentation of her complaints or treatment orders, and the Unit Manager was unaware of her concerns. An observation revealed her genitals were reddened, inflamed, and bleeding.
The facility failed to provide behavior monitoring for two residents prescribed antipsychotic medications. One resident with severe cognitive impairment was on Seroquel for depression, but no behavior monitoring was documented. Another resident with psychotic and depressive disorders was on Duloxetine and Pimavanserin, yet lacked behavior monitoring documentation. This indicates non-compliance with monitoring policies.
A resident was found with unsecured Gentamycin ointment in her bedside drawer, which she was using inappropriately. The resident, who was alert and oriented, admitted to using the ointment for relief of itching and burning on her genitals instead of her prescribed toe. The Unit Manager acknowledged that medications should not have been unsecured at the bedside.
A resident with mild cognitive impairment and physical limitations was not assisted out of bed for 14 days due to a lack of coordination between rehabilitation and nursing staff. The PT did not communicate the need for a hoyer lift and specialized chair to the CNA, and the ADON had not documented efforts to order the necessary chair.
A resident's physician-ordered vital signs and cough secretions monitoring were not accurately documented, revealing inconsistencies and omissions in the facility's records. Interviews with staff showed a lack of clarity and accountability in the documentation process, with vital signs not recorded on several days and missing details about the resident's condition. The Assistant DON could not explain the incomplete documentation, indicating a deficiency in the facility's practices.
The facility failed to follow CDC guidelines for infection control, with staff not adhering to Contact and Enhanced Barrier Precautions for three residents. A maintenance worker entered a resident's room without PPE, a nurse used shared equipment against guidelines, and a CNA misunderstood precaution requirements, leading to breaches in infection control.
A resident with a UTI experienced a delay in treatment due to the facility's failure to obtain urinalysis results in a timely manner. The resident, who was frequently incontinent of urine, had an order for a urinalysis culture and sensitivity, but the results were not available until five days later. The resident was prescribed an antibiotic only after the results were received. An interview with the Desk Nurse indicated that preliminary results should have been followed up within 24-48 hours, but this did not occur.
Incorrect Medication Prepared Due to Misidentification of Ascorbic Acid
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves a failure to ensure correct medications were given according to physician orders, resident preferences, and goals for one resident during a medication administration observation. Facility policy on Clinical-Medication Administration required nurses to have a working knowledge of medications, including common dosage, uses, side effects, and the reason for administration, and to observe the rights of medication administration, including the right medicine. Resident #155 had been admitted with diagnoses including a displaced avulsion fracture of the left talus, a pressure ulcer, acute kidney failure, and type 2 diabetes mellitus, and had a Brief Interview of Mental Status score of 15, indicating intact cognition. The physician’s orders included ascorbic acid 500 mg by mouth once daily for wound healing, and there was no order for Saccharomyces boulardii 500 mg. During a medication pass observation, an LPN prepared Saccharomyces boulardii 500 mg and entered the resident’s room intending to administer it, despite there being no order for this medication for the resident. The surveyor intervened before the wrong medication was given, preventing administration. In a subsequent interview, the LPN stated she believed ascorbic acid 500 mg was the same as the probiotic Saccharomyces boulardii 500 mg. When asked for another name for ascorbic acid, the LPN looked it up, identified it as Vitamin C, and acknowledged it was not the same medication, confirming a lack of correct knowledge and verification of the ordered drug prior to administration.
Improper wound care technique during pressure ulcer treatment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide wound care for a resident with multiple pressure ulcers in a manner consistent with professional standards of practice and the physician’s orders. The resident had diagnoses including quadriplegia, chronic osteomyelitis of the left thigh, pressure ulcer of unspecified site, severe protein calorie malnutrition, and major depressive disorder, and the MDS documented moderate cognitive impairment. The ordered treatment for the sacrum, right ischium, and left ischium included cleansing with Dakin’s solution, applying hydrogel or SilvaSorb to the wound bed, and covering with silicone foam dressing. During observed wound care, the wound care RN used Dakin’s-soaked gauze to cleanse not only the wound beds but also the surrounding skin of all three wounds. He removed and reapplied gloves after touching the privacy curtain, then used the same tongue depressor repeatedly to remove silver gel from a medication cup and apply it to all three wounds and surrounding skin. The RN also placed silver gel on the peri-wound area, and the wound care NP stated the peri-wound should not be cleansed with Dakin’s solution, the silver gel should not be applied to the peri-wound, and the same tongue depressor should not be used across multiple wounds because it could cross-contaminate the wounds. The RN then soaked a single long piece of gauze in Dakin’s solution and placed it across the right ischium wound, over healthy skin, onto the sacral wound, across more healthy skin, onto the left ischium wound, and back again, rather than placing it only in each wound bed. The dressing was then covered with two bordered dressings, but the gauze between the sacrum and right ischium was not completely covered. The wound care NP stated this approach would destroy healthy tissue between the wounds and that all gauze and the wound should be covered because the resident had stool incontinence despite a colostomy. The RN later stated he realized he could improve in some areas with the wound care he provided.
Failure to Secure Indwelling Urinary Catheter
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that an indwelling urinary catheter was secured in place for one resident. The resident had diagnoses including quadriplegia, chronic osteomyelitis of the left thigh, pressure ulcer of unspecified site, severe protein calorie malnutrition, and major depressive disorder, and the MDS documented moderate cognitive impairment with a BIMS score of 12. The resident had an order dated 02/05/26 for urinary catheter care that included changing catheter anchor or securing devices as needed and encouraging and assisting the resident to use or apply the securing device as tolerated. During an observation of wound care on 02/11/26, the resident's indwelling urinary catheter was observed to be not anchored. After the wound care was completed, the CNA removed the adhesive from the anchor that was on the catheter tubing and secured the catheter to the resident's upper right thigh. During interview, the CNA stated she noticed the catheter was not attached to the resident, so she removed the backing and adhered the anchor to the resident's leg to secure the tubing.
Dirty Midline Dressing Not Changed as Ordered
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain a sanitary IV access dressing and failed to change the dressing according to facility policy for one resident with a midline. The resident was admitted with a diagnosis of heart failure and had a BIMS score of 13, indicating cognitive intactness. Orders showed a peripheral/midline was inserted for IV fluids for hypotension and persistent AKI, and the midline was later discontinued. The record did not contain orders for IV dressing changes or IV monitoring/assessment, and the care plan did not include IV or midline care since admission. During observation, the resident had a right upper arm midline with a dressing that appeared dirty and had dried dark red blood underneath it. The dressing was dated 01/29, which was 11 days earlier. The resident stated that medications had been completed the prior week, that nurses told her they could not remove the line without a doctor’s order, and that no one had changed the dressing since insertion. The resident also stated, "It hurts and it is pinching my skin." The resident later stated the IV was removed and her arm felt better after it was taken out. Staff interviews showed nurses and the ADON stated IV assessments were done every shift and that IV dressings for PICCs and midlines were changed weekly and as needed. Staff also stated they would expect to see a dressing change order and a care plan for a resident with an IV. When shown the resident’s IV dressing, multiple staff members described it as bloody, dirty, crusty, yucky, and needing to be changed. The DON agreed with the findings and stated she would look for the care plan, and later acknowledged there was no care plan for the resident’s midline.
Failure to Perform Ordered Tracheostomy Assessment and Suctioning
Penalty
Summary
Safe and appropriate respiratory care was not provided for a resident with a tracheostomy when staff failed to follow physician orders and facility policy during tracheostomy care. The resident was admitted with anoxic brain damage and acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, had severe cognitive impairment, and had active orders for oxygen via trach collar at 4 LPM as tolerated every shift, trach care every shift and as needed, and suctioning every shift and as needed. The care plan directed staff to monitor and document respiratory status, obtain and report vital signs as ordered and as needed, and provide suctioning as ordered and tolerated. During an observed tracheostomy care session, an LPN performed hand hygiene and donned a gown and gloves, set up supplies, and began tracheostomy care, but did not perform a respiratory assessment. While cleaning the trach collar, the resident began coughing and expelling secretions, and a mucus plug was visualized. The LPN wiped secretions from the top of the trach cannula and observed continued coughing with small amounts of secretions expelled across the room, stated she should suction the resident, but did not suction the resident. She checked the pulse oximetry and stated it was 97%, then completed the care and left the room without performing a respiratory assessment. In interview, the LPN stated this was the first time she had performed tracheostomy care by herself on a resident and that she had last trained for it in 2022. She stated she knew how to suction and perform respiratory assessments but did not do so because she was nervous and believed she had only done a dressing change. Her competency validation for trach care documented that she was to assess HR, RR, SaO2, and lung sounds, remove soiled dressing, assess the stoma site, suction if necessary, and reassess the patient, and it was signed off as acceptable. The DON agreed with the findings and stated the nurses needed more education.
Unauthorized Access and Improper Medication Storage
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that drugs and biologicals were stored and accessed in accordance with policy and accepted principles. During wound care for Resident #21, Staff A, a WCRN, gave his keys to Staff B, a CNA, so she could stock the medication treatment carts. Staff A stated this was how they worked and that she was part of his team, while Staff B said she was going to restock the treatment carts. The Director of Human Resources confirmed Staff B was not a Qualified Med Tech and had no job description authorization to access medications, including treatment carts. The facility also failed to keep one of eight med carts locked when a nurse left it unlocked and unattended while entering a resident’s room to administer medications. The facility further failed to secure medications at the bedside for Resident #155. The resident was admitted with diagnoses including displaced avulsion fracture of the left talus, pressure ulcer of another site, acute kidney failure, and type 2 diabetes mellitus, and the MDS documented a BIMS score of 15. The record showed no assessment for self-administration of medications, and the physician’s orders included only ascorbic acid 500 mg daily for wound healing. During a medication pass, several over-the-counter medications were observed on the resident’s overbed table in an open clear container, including magnesium gummies, tension headache relief acetaminophen, Tums extra strength, Benadryl Allergy tablets, and Vicks nasal solution. The LPN acknowledged the medications were at the bedside and that the resident had no order or assessment for self-administration.
Failure to Serve Ground Meats per Diet Order
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to serve ground meats according to a physician's diet order for a resident who was on a regular diet with regular texture foods and thin liquids, with ground meat added on 08/06/25 at the request of his daughter for ease of chewing. The resident had been admitted with diagnoses including cerebral atherosclerosis, unspecified dementia with behavioral disturbance, and sarcopenia, and had also been receiving hospice services since 09/09/2022. A review of the resident's diet in the facility's meat ticket program showed only a regular diet with regular texture food and regular/thin liquids, and did not reflect the ground meat order. During observation, the resident was found chewing a large piece of food and removed brown chewed-up food from his mouth that appeared to be half of a small hamburger. The CNA stated she had just finished feeding him, and the tray retrieved from the cart showed a meal ticket listing a regular diet with regular texture foods and thin fluids. The resident had been served regular texture beef pot pie, and the leftover food included stringy beef that should have been ground. On a later observation, the resident was served whole waffles, corn flakes, and two whole round sausage patties, again matching the meal ticket rather than the ground meat order. A CNA stated she believed the resident's diet was identified by the meal ticket and found that the diet was not listed in the Kardex.
Failure to Timely Issue Refunds to Discharged Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to issue refunds to discharged residents or their representatives within 30 days, as required. Record review and interviews revealed that three residents who were discharged from the facility had not received refunds for overpaid amounts. One resident was discharged to an assisted living facility, and the family member confirmed that despite multiple calls and emails to the Business Office Manager (BOM), the refund had not been received. The BOM acknowledged that a request for the refund was not sent to the corporate biller until two months after discharge, partly due to communication issues with the previous BOM. The Aging Report confirmed that the resident was owed $4,888.20. Further review showed that two additional residents were also owed refunds of $2,177.64 and $871.18, respectively, after their discharges. The BOM confirmed that these refunds had not been processed, as the amounts remained on the Aging Report. The BOM stated that she was aware of the outstanding refunds and agreed with the findings. Photographic evidence was obtained to support the deficiency.
Neglect Due to Inadequate Supervision of Exit-Seeking Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to protect a resident from neglect by not providing appropriate supervision for a resident who displayed exit-seeking behaviors. The resident, who had a history of traumatic brain injury and severe cognitive impairment, was admitted with diagnoses including traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage and major depressive disorder. Despite being identified as having wandering behavior, the resident was moved to a secured floor without continued one-to-one observation, which was initially implemented due to exit-seeking behavior. On the morning of the incident, the resident was observed wandering and attempting to exit the building, setting off an alarm. However, the staff did not reinstate one-to-one observation, and the resident was left unsupervised. The resident managed to remove a window panel and fell approximately 20 feet to the ground, sustaining serious injuries. Interviews with staff revealed a lack of communication and documentation regarding the resident's exit-seeking behavior and the necessary supervision required. The staff, including LPNs and CNAs, were not adequately informed or trained to recognize and respond to exit-seeking behaviors effectively. The facility's failure to maintain appropriate supervision and communication among staff members contributed to the resident's ability to exit through the window, resulting in the fall and subsequent injuries.
Removal Plan
- Resident was assessed and 911 called to transport to hospital for higher level of care.
- Director of Nursing (DON) notified Interim Administrator, Regional Director of Operations (RDO), Nurse Consultant, President of Clinical Services of incident.
- The Facility conducted a head count of residents currently residing in the facility, all were accounted for and safe.
- RDO and DON notified the Regional Maintenance Director to report to the center to make sure the windows are secure.
- Medical Director, Primary and Advanced Registered Nurse Practitioner (ARNP) notified of incident.
- Wandering risk User-Defined Assessment (UDA) was completed on all wandering/elopement risk residents.
- A Facility wide audit was conducted by DON/Designee to identify other residents who are at high risk for exit seeking and to prevent recurrence of the event.
- Signs were placed at the main exit doors to residents from exiting.
- Initiated every shift behavior management drill X 2 weeks then Bi-Weekly drills X 30 days. Monthly X 3 months. Post-test included for drills.
- In-services and competencies-initiated by the Director of Nursing/ Designee, facility-wide on prevention of Neglect and placing a resident on 1:1 observation when exit seeking is identified, regardless of the security of the unit, behavioral residents' management.
- Upon hire and as necessary, staff will complete an in-service education on neglect and the elopement system and management of behavioral residents.
- A Performance Improvement Plan was created and an Ad-hoc QAPI initiated as it relates to F600: Freedom from Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation and meeting conducted.
- Adult Protective Services (APS) was notified online.
- All newly admitted residents will continue to be screened for exit seeking behaviors on admission, quarterly, annually and as needed. The DON/Designee will audit screens weekly X 4 weeks and monthly for 2 months to ensure that all precautions measures are implemented.
- The findings of the above audits will be reported to the Quality Assurance/Performance Improvement Committee weekly until the committee determines substantial compliance has been met.
Resident Falls from Window Due to Inadequate Supervision
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide appropriate supervision to prevent a resident from falling from a second-floor window. The resident, who was admitted with a history of traumatic brain injury, major depressive disorder, and a history of falling, was severely cognitively impaired and exhibited wandering behavior. Despite these risk factors, the resident was moved to a secured second floor without continued one-to-one observation, which had been in place due to previous exit-seeking behavior. On the morning of the incident, the resident was observed wandering and attempting to exit the building, setting off an alarm at an exit door. However, the staff did not recognize these actions as exit-seeking behavior and did not reinstate one-to-one observation. The resident was last seen sitting on his bed shortly before he removed a window panel and fell approximately 20 feet to the ground, resulting in serious injuries. Interviews with staff revealed a lack of communication and documentation regarding the resident's exit-seeking behavior and the need for increased supervision. The staff on duty were not fully informed of the resident's history and risk factors, leading to inadequate monitoring and failure to prevent the accident.
Removal Plan
- Resident was assessed and 911 called to transport to hospital for higher level of care.
- Director of Nursing notified interim Administrator, Regional Director of Operations, Nurse Consultant, President of Clinical Services of incident.
- The Facility conducted a head count of residents currently residing in the facility, all were accounted for and safe.
- Regional Director of Operations and Director of Nursing notified the Regional Maintenance Director to report to the center to make sure the windows are secure.
- All windows were reinforced with extra screw to window/frame.
- Resident environment was free of accident hazards and each resident received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents.
- Medical Director, Primary and Advanced Registered Nurse Practitioner notified of incident.
- Wandering risk User-Defined Assessment completed on all wandering/elopement risk residents.
- Signs placed at main exit doors to not let any residents exit.
- Initiated every shift elopement drills then Bi-Weekly Elopement drills. Monthly. In addition, Every shift behavior management drill then Bi-Weekly Elopement drills. Monthly post-test included for both drills.
- In-services and competencies-initiated by the Director of Nursing/ Designee, facility-wide on prevention of Resident Abuse, Neglect, elopement, resident safety, behavior management.
- Upon hire and as necessary, staff will complete this in-service education on neglect and the elopement system.
Failure to Investigate Injury of Unknown Origin
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to investigate an injury of unknown origin for a resident with severe cognitive impairment who was dependent on staff for activities of daily living. The resident was admitted to the facility and later complained of knee pain during movement with a physical therapist. A progress note indicated that a Nurse Practitioner was informed of positive knee X-ray results, which showed a fracture, and the resident was sent to the hospital ER for further evaluation. However, a review of the facility's adverse and incident log did not reveal any incident report for this occurrence. During an interview, the Assistant Director of Nursing stated that the knee fracture was believed to be due to osteoporosis but could not provide documentation of such a diagnosis. Furthermore, the injury of unknown origin was not investigated as required by the facility's policy.
Failure to Conduct Required PASARR Screenings
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to obtain a Level I Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) for two residents, which is required for individuals with mental disorders or intellectual disabilities who need more than 30 days of care. Resident #67 was admitted post-hospitalization with diagnoses including cerebral atherosclerosis, vascular dementia, anxiety, and dysphagia. The resident's Admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment indicated severe cognitive impairment, yet no PASARR was conducted. The facility's administrator confirmed the absence of a PASARR for this resident. Similarly, Resident #90, admitted with a diagnosis of psychotic disorder, also lacked evidence of a Level I PASARR prior to admission. The Assistant Director of Nursing acknowledged the absence of the required screening for this resident.
Failure to Address Resident's Discomfort in a Timely Manner
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to address a resident's discomfort in a timely manner, as evidenced by the case of a resident who was admitted with a urinary catheter. The resident reported experiencing itching and burning sensations in her genitals, which she believed to be a yeast infection, after her catheter was changed due to a blockage. Despite informing the nurse of her symptoms and the nurse's assurance to obtain an order for an ointment, the resident did not receive any treatment for her discomfort. The resident resorted to using an antibiotic cream prescribed for her toe on her genitals for relief. There was no documentation of the catheter change, the resident's complaints, or any orders for treatment in the resident's records. The Unit Manager, unaware of the resident's concerns, did not observe any issues when discontinuing the catheter. The Desk Nurse was informed of the resident's concerns only two hours prior to the interview and was awaiting a physician's response for orders. An observation revealed the resident's genitals were reddened, inflamed, and bleeding, and the resident was resistant to relinquishing the ointment she was using for relief.
Failure to Monitor Behavior for Residents on Antipsychotic Medications
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide behavior monitoring for two residents who were prescribed antipsychotic medications. Resident #105, who was admitted with diagnoses including Cerebral Atherosclerosis, Unspecified dementia, and Major Depressive Disorder, was started on Seroquel for depression. Despite the requirement for behavior monitoring due to the use of this medication, no such monitoring was documented in the resident's electronic treatment administration record (e-tar). This was confirmed during an interview with a Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) and the facility's consultant pharmacist. Similarly, Resident #63, who was admitted with diagnoses of Psychotic Disorder and Major Depressive Disorder, was receiving antipsychotics and antidepressants. The resident's care plan indicated a risk for behavior symptoms related to these conditions. However, a review of the resident's records revealed no documentation of behavior monitoring, despite the presence of orders for medications such as Duloxetine and Pimavanserin. This lack of documentation indicates a failure to adhere to the facility's policies and procedures for monitoring residents on such medications.
Failure to Secure Resident Medications
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to secure a resident's medications, leading to a deficiency in medication management. Resident #246, who was alert and oriented, was found to have a tube of Gentamycin ointment in her bedside drawer, which she was using inappropriately on her genitals instead of her prescribed toe. This was discovered during an interview with the resident, who admitted to using the antibiotic cream for relief of itching and burning. The Unit Manager confirmed that the resident should not have had any medications unsecured at her bedside.
Failure to Coordinate Care for Resident Requiring Specialized Equipment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to coordinate care for a resident requiring specialized rehabilitative services, specifically related to the use of a hoyer lift and a specialized chair. The resident, who was admitted with mild cognitive impairment and required total assistance with activities of daily living due to a laminectomy and physical limitations, had not been out of bed since admission. Despite the resident expressing a desire to get out of bed, the therapy notes did not document any reason for the resident's continued bed confinement. The Physical Therapist (PT) acknowledged the resident's need for a specialized chair and a hoyer lift for safe transfer but had not communicated this requirement to the Certified Nurse Assistant (CNA) responsible for the resident's care. Interviews revealed a lack of communication and coordination between the rehabilitation and nursing staff. The PT assumed it was the CNA's responsibility to get the resident out of bed, while the CNA stated they were only informed on the day of the interview that the resident could be transferred using a hoyer lift. The Rehabilitation Director confirmed that every resident should be out of bed unless contraindicated and noted that a recliner chair could be used temporarily. However, the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) had not documented any attempt to order the appropriate chair for the resident, although they claimed to be in the process of doing so.
Deficiency in Documentation of Physician Orders
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to accurately document physician-ordered vital signs and cough secretions monitoring for a resident who was readmitted with multiple diagnoses, including hypertension and a history of falling. The resident had a BIMS score indicating moderately impaired cognitive function. Physician orders required the resident to perform cough and deep breathing exercises four times daily, with documentation of tolerance and sputum production, and to have vital signs taken every shift for three days, then daily. However, the records showed inconsistencies and omissions in documenting these orders. Vital signs were not recorded on several days, and when recorded, they lacked details about the shift. Additionally, there was a lack of documentation regarding the resident's breath sounds, sputum production, and tolerance to the exercises. Interviews with staff revealed a lack of clarity and accountability regarding the documentation process. An LPN stated that vital signs were taken by CNAs and nurses but were not consistently documented in the electronic health records. The Assistant DON was unable to explain why the documentation was incomplete or why only one RN documented in the progress notes. The facility's failure to adhere to physician orders and maintain accurate records was discussed with the Administrator and Assistant DON, highlighting a deficiency in the facility's documentation practices.
Failure to Implement CDC Infection Control Guidelines
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to implement CDC guidelines for Contact Precautions for two residents and Enhanced Barrier Precautions for one resident. For the first resident, who had a thoracostomy and other medical conditions, a maintenance staff member entered the room without performing hand hygiene or using PPE, despite clear signage indicating Contact Precautions. The staff member was unaware of the precautions, which led to a breach in infection control protocols. For the second resident, who had hypertension and other chronic conditions, a registered nurse used a blood pressure machine that was supposed to be dedicated to the resident under Contact Precautions. However, a housekeeping staff member reported that the machine was used for another resident, indicating a failure to adhere to the guidelines for dedicated equipment. Additionally, the housekeeping staff did not consistently use PPE or perform hand hygiene as required by the Contact Precautions. The third resident, who had a history of falling and other medical issues, was supposed to be under Enhanced Barrier Precautions. A CNA assisted the resident without wearing a gown, mistakenly believing that only the resident's roommate required such precautions. This misunderstanding and lack of adherence to the guidelines resulted in another breach of infection control protocols, as the CNA's personal clothing came into contact with the resident's bed linen and wheelchair parts.
Delay in Urinalysis Results Leads to Treatment Delay
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to obtain urinalysis results in a timely manner for a resident with a urinary tract infection (UTI), leading to a delay in treatment. The resident, who was cognitively intact and frequently incontinent of urine, was admitted to the facility and had an order for a urinalysis culture and sensitivity on December 22, 2023. However, there was no documentation indicating the reason for the urinalysis order or any signs or symptoms of the resident's condition. The urine was collected and received on December 23, 2023, but the results were not available until December 27, 2023, when a specific bacteria was identified. Consequently, the resident was prescribed an antibiotic on December 27, 2023, and received it at 5:00 PM, five days after the initial urinalysis order. An interview with the Desk Nurse revealed that preliminary results are typically available within 24 hours and should be communicated to the physician, but in this case, the preliminary report was not documented as received, and the nurse did not follow up on the urinalysis results within the expected 24-48 hours timeframe.
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.



