Page Rehabilitation And Healthcare Center
Inspection history, citations, penalties and survey trends for this long-term care facility in Fort Myers, Florida.
- Location
- 2310 N Airport Road, Fort Myers, Florida 33907
- CMS Provider Number
- 105864
- Inspections on file
- 29
- Latest survey
- October 28, 2025
- Citations (last 12 mo.)
- 8
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Page Rehabilitation And Healthcare Center during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident with multiple mobility impairments and a history of lower extremity fractures was injured when a restorative CNA assisted with range of motion exercises in a manner not specified in the care plan. The aide provided hands-on assistance during what should have been active range of motion (AROM) exercises, resulting in a popping sound and severe knee pain. Subsequent evaluation revealed a closed fracture of the lateral tibial plateau. Staff interviews confirmed that only AROM was recommended and that aides were not trained to perform passive range of motion (PROM), indicating a failure to follow the resident's care plan.
A resident with significant mobility and cognitive impairments experienced multiple falls while attempting to use the bathroom independently. Despite care plans outlining fall prevention strategies such as regular toileting, use of call lights, and environmental safety measures, documentation showed inconsistent implementation and follow-through by staff. Gaps in providing timely assistance and unclear documentation contributed to repeated incidents.
A resident with significant mobility and cognitive impairments experienced multiple falls due to the facility's failure to consistently implement and document individualized fall prevention interventions, including timely toileting and supervision. Despite updates to the care plan after each incident, there was no evidence that key interventions, such as frequent checks and scheduled toileting, were carried out as required.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment was allegedly hit by a CNA after the resident bit the CNA during care. A Social Worker Assistant witnessed the incident and reported it to the Administrator. The facility's investigation verified the abuse allegation, leading to the CNA's suspension and reporting to authorities.
A CNA was reported to have hit a resident during care, as witnessed by a Social Worker Assistant. The CNA denied the allegation, claiming the resident was combative and bit her. The resident, who has a history of being pleasant but sometimes combative, was transferred to the memory care unit for increased supervision. The facility's investigation verified the allegation.
A resident with dementia and psychosis eloped from a facility and was found deceased after expressing paranoid behaviors and a desire to leave. Despite these signs, the facility failed to re-evaluate the resident's elopement risk or update the care plan for increased supervision. Staff observed the resident outside but did not intervene, and communication lapses contributed to the neglect. The facility's investigation did not initially find neglect, despite evidence to the contrary.
A cognitively impaired resident with a history of psychiatric conditions expressed paranoia and intent to leave the facility. Despite clear signs of distress, the facility failed to reassess the resident's elopement risk or update the care plan for increased supervision. The resident exited the facility unsupervised and was later found deceased, highlighting the severe consequences of inadequate supervision.
A resident with Bipolar disorder and paranoia expressed intent to leave the facility, believing he was under attack. Despite warnings from the resident's son and law enforcement, the facility failed to reassess the resident's elopement risk or update his care plan. The resident was later found deceased after being reported missing, highlighting deficiencies in the facility's investigation and corrective actions.
The facility failed to provide a safe, clean, and comfortable environment for residents, with deficiencies observed in all units. Issues included improperly stored bedpans and urinals, rusted and dirty faucets, unlabeled personal items, and dead insects. The ice machine and refrigerator in the memory care unit were also neglected, with expired milk and substances found. The DON acknowledged the lack of a policy for storing personal items.
The facility failed to securely store and properly administer medications, as observed during a survey. A resident had a potassium pill left on her bedside table without an order to self-administer, and another resident's Albuterol inhaler was left unattended. Additionally, pills were found on the floor in two separate locations, indicating a failure to adhere to the facility's medication administration policy.
The facility's pest control program was ineffective, as evidenced by live and dead insects found in resident rooms and common areas. Despite monthly pest control services, residents frequently reported sightings of large crawling insects, with some insects contaminating food and personal spaces. The facility's pest control policy assigns responsibility to the Maintenance Department, but there was no proactive inspection by staff to identify pest issues.
Improper Restorative Nursing Technique Results in Resident Fracture
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide restorative nursing services as specified in the care plan for a resident, resulting in a fracture. The resident, who had diagnoses including necrotizing fasciitis, osteoarthritis, a previous displaced fracture of the right tibia, and bilateral foot drop, required substantial to maximal assistance for bed mobility and transfers. The care plan and therapy recommendations specified that the resident should perform active range of motion (AROM) exercises independently, with encouragement to spend less time in bed, and did not recommend passive range of motion (PROM) to be performed by restorative aides. On the day of the incident, a restorative CNA was providing range of motion exercises to the resident's lower extremities. During the session, the aide assisted the resident by lifting her right leg and bending her knee, which was not in accordance with the AROM-only recommendation. Both the resident and the aide heard a popping sound, and the resident immediately experienced severe pain. The incident was reported, and initial x-rays were negative, but subsequent evaluation by an orthopedic specialist revealed a closed fracture of the lateral tibial plateau. Interviews with facility staff, including the Director of Rehabilitation and a physical therapist, confirmed that only AROM was recommended and that restorative aides were not trained or authorized to perform PROM. The physical therapist indicated that the aide should not have had hands-on involvement during AROM, and the Director of Rehabilitation acknowledged that PROM could result in fractures, especially in residents with conditions such as osteoporosis or decreased strength. The deviation from the care plan and improper technique during restorative care directly led to the resident's injury.
Failure to Implement and Document Fall Prevention Interventions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to implement individualized interventions and provide adequate supervision to prevent avoidable falls for a resident with multiple risk factors, including cerebral infarction, muscle wasting, impaired mobility, and cognitive deficits. The resident experienced four falls over a short period, each time attempting to go to the bathroom independently. Despite being identified as at risk for falls and having care plans that included interventions such as keeping the call light within reach, encouraging use of the call light, providing lateral fall pads, and ensuring a safe environment, documentation showed inconsistent implementation of these interventions. There was also conflicting information regarding the resident's continence status and the frequency of toileting assistance provided. The facility's records lacked evidence that staff consistently provided timely incontinent care or regular toileting, particularly in the hours leading up to the falls. After each fall, care plans were updated with additional interventions, such as posting signs to remind the resident to call for help, using nonskid footwear, and checking the resident every 15 minutes post-fall. However, there was no documentation that these interventions were reliably implemented. Staff interviews confirmed gaps in documentation and uncertainty about whether new interventions were carried out as planned.
Plan Of Correction
Corrective action will be accomplished for those residents found to have been affected by the deficient ice. Resident #2 no longer resides at the facility. You will identify other residents having the potential to be affected by the same deficient practice. What corrective action will be taken? A resident in the facility will be re-evaluated for bowel and bladder function by August 1st, 2025, by the facility nurse management. Based on the evaluation, the resident will be placed on the proper bowel and bladder program (toileting, check and change routinely, etc.) to ensure that bowel/bladder needs are being met appropriately. The program will then be triggered in point of care for the CNA's to document on every 2 hours or as directed. Facility nurse management will review each bladder evaluation upon admission, quarterly, and during significant changes to ensure that the evaluation is completed appropriately and that the bowel/bladder program is appropriate and meets the needs of the resident. Facility IDT will review each resident with a fall for the past 3 months, ongoing, and complete an analysis as needed. The analysis will include a root cause analysis to determine the underlying factors contributing to the falls. The facility will implement a plan of action based on the root cause analysis, including interventions to prevent future falls. The nurse management will monitor the effectiveness of these interventions over the next 30 days and then weekly for 90 days. Each resident with a fall will be reviewed in the morning clinical meeting daily and in the weekly risk management meeting as part of the facility policy. The facility will also review the documentation related to the fall, including the lack of timely toileting (6 hours before the fall), and ensure that appropriate prevention interventions are in place. An interview was held with Resident #2 regarding multiple falls. Riding toileting to prevent falls should have been implemented, and the resident should have been toileted more frequently before bed, with routine checks and documentation of the 15-minute checks to ensure fall prevention. The root cause analysis was completed, and the facility will implement appropriate corrective actions based on the findings. The DON/RN will oversee the implementation of these actions and ensure ongoing monitoring. The nursing staff will be re-educated on conducting risk assessments and completing timely documentation by August 1st, 2025. They will also be trained on the importance of timely toileting and fall prevention strategies. The Director of Nursing (DON) and Regional Director of Nursing will evaluate the effectiveness of the interventions, conduct audits, and implement continuous quality improvement measures. The results of these evaluations will be reviewed by the facility administrator, and recommendations will be made for ongoing practice improvements. The Nurse V shift will monitor the implementation of the fall prevention program, and the results will be reviewed during the weekly clinical meetings. The facility will ensure that all staff are aware of and adhere to the updated policies and procedures related to fall prevention and resident safety.
Failure to Implement Individualized Fall Prevention Interventions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to implement individualized interventions and adequate supervision to prevent avoidable falls for a resident with multiple risk factors. The resident had a history of cerebral infarction, muscle wasting and atrophy, difficulty walking, lack of coordination, aphasia, and impaired vision. The resident was always incontinent of bladder and bowel, required assistance of two staff for transfers and ambulation, and was identified as being at risk for falls due to impaired cognition, medication use, poor safety awareness, cardiac disease, and decreased mobility. The care plan included interventions such as anticipating needs, ensuring the call light was within reach, and using fall pads, but these interventions were not consistently or effectively implemented. The resident experienced multiple falls over a short period. Each fall investigation revealed that the resident was attempting to ambulate to the bathroom independently, despite being care planned for assistance. Documentation showed inconsistent and infrequent toileting, with significant gaps between toileting times, sometimes up to 11 hours. The fall investigations did not address the lack of timely toileting or incontinent care prior to the falls. Additionally, there were inconsistencies in the bowel and bladder assessment, with conflicting information about the resident's continence status. After each fall, the care plan was updated with new interventions, such as posting signs, ensuring nonskid footwear, and implementing 15-minute checks post-fall. However, there was no documentation that these interventions, particularly the 15-minute checks, were actually implemented. The Director of Nursing was unable to provide evidence that the required checks were performed. The lack of consistent implementation and documentation of individualized interventions contributed to the resident's repeated falls.
Plan Of Correction
What corrective action will be accomplished for those residents found to have been affected by the deficient practice? Resident #2 no longer resides at a facility. How will you identify other residents having the potential to be affected by the same deficient practice and what corrective action will be taken? Each resident in the facility will be re-evaluated for bowel and bladder function by August 1st, 2025, by the facility nurse management. Based on the evaluation, the resident will be placed on the proper bowel/bladder program (toileting, check and change routinely, etc.) to ensure that bowel and bladder needs are being met appropriately. The program will then be triggered in the point of care for the CNA to document on every 2 hours or as directed. The facility nurse management will review each bowel/bladder evaluation upon admission, quarterly, and with significant change to ensure that the evaluation is completed appropriately and that the bowel/bladder program is appropriate and meets the needs of the resident. The facility IDT will review each resident with a fall for the past 30 days by August 1st, 2025, and each fall going forward to ensure that root cause analysis was completed and that toileting needs are being met where needed. Interventions will be implemented according to findings upon review. The facility management will also review each fall for the past 30 days by August 1st, 2025, and each fall going forward to ensure that safety checks were complete as care planned and forms are present with the root cause analysis audit. What measures will be put into place or what systematic changes will be made to ensure that the deficient practice does not recur? The nurse management team will be re-educated by the Regional Director on completing bowel/bladder evaluations, conducting root cause analysis for falls, and implementing appropriate interventions based on the root cause analysis (toileting, 15-minute checks, etc.) along with the fall prevention policy and procedure on July 24th, 2025. The nursing staff (nurses and CNAs) will be re-educated by the Staff Educator/Designee by August 1st, 2025, on completing bowel/bladder evaluations, conducting root cause analysis for falls, implementing and completing appropriate interventions (toileting, 15-minute checks), and the fall prevention policy and procedure. This re-education will include documentation of the toileting program in the point of care for the CNAs. The DON/Risk Manager will complete an audit of each resident who has a fall to ensure that the root cause analysis was completed, interventions were placed according to the root cause analysis, safety check sheets are completed as ordered, and any testing needs are being met as care planned based on bowel and bladder programs. The Nurse Management team will complete an audit each shift to monitor the documentation and the toileting programs for individual residents. How will the corrective action be monitored to ensure the deficient practice will not recur? The results of the audits will be forwarded to the Administrator and the Director of Nursing for review. The audit will then be forwarded to the monthly Quality Assurance Meeting for further review and recommendations. The audits will continue daily for 30 days and then weekly for 90 days. Each resident with a fall will be reviewed at the morning clinical meeting daily and continue to be reviewed in the weekly at-risk meeting indefinitely as part of the facility policy and procedure. Date of Compliance: August 1st, 2025
Resident Abuse Incident Involving CNA
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to protect a resident's right to be free from abuse and neglect, as evidenced by an incident involving a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) and a resident. The incident occurred when the CNA was attempting to provide care to the resident, who was in a wheelchair. During this interaction, the resident became agitated, pushed against the CNA, and bit her. A Social Worker Assistant witnessed the CNA hitting the resident in response to being bitten. The Social Worker Assistant intervened, took the resident away, and reported the incident to the facility's Administrator. The resident involved in the incident had been admitted to the facility with diagnoses including major cognitive impairment and was residing in a secured unit for individuals with memory care needs. The resident's cognitive abilities were severely impaired, as indicated by a low score on the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment. Following the incident, the resident was unable to recall the event due to her advanced cognitive impairment but did report having pain in the area where she was allegedly hit. The facility's investigation into the incident included reviewing witness statements and interviewing staff. The CNA involved denied hitting the resident, claiming the Social Worker Assistant was lying. However, the facility's investigation concluded that the allegation of abuse was verified. The CNA was immediately suspended, and the incident was reported to law enforcement and Adult Protective Services. The resident's daughter, who is also her Health Care Surrogate, was informed of the incident and provided background on her mother's condition and care needs.
Plan Of Correction
This plan of correction constitutes this facility's written allegation of compliance for the deficiencies cited. However, submission of this Plan of Correction is not admission that a deficiency exists or that one was cited correctly. This Plan of Correction is submitted to meet requirements established by state and federal law. 1. What corrective action(s) will be accomplished for those residents found to have been affected by the deficient practice; The CNA was suspended on. The CNA was terminated on. The CNA was reported to the Nurse Aide Registry on. The resident was evaluated by the Psych APRN and The Care ARPN on. New orders were received for 50mg every 6 hours as needed for or. 2. How will you identify other residents having potential to be affected by the same deficient practice and what corrective action will be taken; All residents residing in the Burroughs unit had the potential to be affected. The CNA involved worked full time on that unit only. Skin evaluations were completed on every resident on the Burroughs unit on. There were no abnormal findings indicating any type of or neglect. The CNA was suspended on and terminated on. All staff were re-educated on the policy and procedure, customer service and resident rights related to by the Nurse Management Team. This training was initiated on and was ongoing until all staff were completed. The completion date was. Knowledge verification was completed by administering a post test to all employees. The facility met with the QIO team on. The QIO team provided the facility with a De-escalation toolkit and provided training to the ADON, Staff Educator, DON and Administrator. The ADON completed the De-escalation training with all staff. This was completed to 27th, 2025. The staff remaining were removed from the schedule and the training is being offered every Tuesday as part of new hire orientation. The staff remaining will attend at that time and then may resume their normal working schedule. Knowledge verification was completed by administering a pre and post test to all employees who attended the training. 3. What measures will be put into place or what systematic changes you will make to ensure that the deficient practice does not recur. All staff were re-educated on the policy and procedure, customer service and resident rights related to by the Nurse Management Team. This training was initiated on and was ongoing until all staff were completed. The completion date was. Knowledge verification was completed by administering a post test to all employees. The facility met with the QIO team on. The QIO team provided the facility with a De-escalation toolkit and provided training to the ADON, Staff Educator, DON and Administrator. The ADON completed the De-escalation training with all staff. This was completed to 27th, 2025. The staff remaining were removed from the schedule and the training is being offered every Tuesday as part of new hire orientation. The staff remaining will attend at that time and then may resume their normal working schedule. Knowledge verification was completed by administering a pre and post test to all employees who attended the training. Daily knowledge checks and audits will assess staff adherence to the education provided starting on. These will.
CNA Allegedly Hits Resident During Care
Penalty
Summary
A Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) was reported to have hit a resident during an incident that occurred in the doorway of the resident's room. The Social Worker Assistant witnessed the CNA hitting the resident and immediately intervened, taking the resident away and escorting the CNA to the Administrator's office. The CNA claimed that the resident had been cursing and bit her, but denied hitting the resident. The Social Worker Assistant documented the incident, stating that she saw the CNA hit the resident and heard the resident exclaim that they had been hit with something hard. No other staff witnessed the incident, and the facility's investigation verified the allegation against the CNA. The resident involved in the incident was described as mostly pleasant but sometimes combative during care. The resident's daughter, who is also her Health Care Surrogate, mentioned that her mother had been diagnosed with a condition approximately 12 years ago and had sustained injuries that led to her admission to the facility for rehabilitation. The resident was later transferred to the memory care unit for increased supervision. Following the incident, the resident began experiencing distress, prompting the Unit Manager to contact the Advanced Practice Registered Nurse (APRN) on call.
Plan Of Correction
The CNA was suspended on and terminated on. All staff were re-educated on the policy and procedure, customer service, and resident rights related to by the Nurse Management Team. This training was initiated on and was ongoing until all staff were completed. The completion date was. Knowledge verification was completed by administering a post test to all employees. The facility met with the QIO team on. The QIO team provided the facility with a De-escalation toolkit and provided training to the ADON, Staff Educator, DON, and Administrator. The ADON completed the De-escalation training with all staff. This was completed to 27th, 2025. The staff remaining were removed from the schedule, and the training is being offered every Tuesday as part of new hire orientation. The staff remaining will attend at that time and then may resume their normal working schedule. Knowledge verification was completed by administering a pre and post test to all employees who attended the training. 3. What measures will be put into place or what systematic changes you will make to ensure that the deficient practice does not recur. All staff were re-educated on the policy and procedure, customer service, and resident rights related to by the Nurse Management Team. This training was initiated on and was ongoing until all staff were completed. The completion date was. The training will be provided every Tuesday as knowledge verification was completed by administering a post test to all employees. The facility met with the QIO team on. The QIO team provided the facility with a De-escalation toolkit and provided training to the ADON, Staff Educator, DON, and Administrator. The ADON completed the De-escalation training with all staff. This was completed to 27th, 2025. The staff remaining were removed from the schedule, and the training is being offered every Tuesday as part of new hire orientation. The staff remaining will attend at that time and then may resume their normal working schedule. Knowledge verification was completed by administering a pre and post test to all employees who attended the training. Daily knowledge checks and audits will assess staff adherence to the education provided starting on. These will be completed by the IDT team on an ongoing random basis on all shifts. Social Services is completing daily random audits with residents and/or family members regarding and neglect.
Neglect Leads to Resident Elopement and Death
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to protect a resident from neglect, resulting in the resident's elopement and subsequent death. The resident, diagnosed with dementia and psychosis, exhibited paranoid behaviors and expressed a desire to leave the facility. Despite these changes in behavior, the facility did not re-evaluate the resident's elopement risk or update the care plan to ensure adequate supervision and safety measures were in place. On multiple occasions, the resident expressed fears of being under attack and requested evacuation, which was reported to the facility by the resident's son and law enforcement. However, the facility did not take appropriate action to address these concerns. Staff observed the resident outside the building but failed to intervene or notify others. Eventually, the resident was found deceased in a parking lot half a mile from the facility. Interviews with facility staff revealed a lack of communication and awareness regarding the resident's change in mental status and the need for increased supervision. The facility's investigation concluded that there was no neglect, despite evidence of the resident's expressed intent to leave and the failure to implement necessary safety measures. The Director of Nursing acknowledged that the resident's risk for elopement was not re-evaluated, and the care plan was not updated to prevent unsafe wandering and elopement.
Failure to Supervise Leads to Resident Elopement and Death
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to recognize and adequately supervise a cognitively impaired resident, leading to a tragic outcome. The resident, who had a history of dementia, bipolar disorder, and other psychiatric conditions, exhibited new symptoms of paranoia and expressed a desire to leave the facility. Despite these clear signs of distress and intent to elope, the facility did not reassess the resident's risk for elopement or update the care plan to ensure adequate supervision. On multiple occasions, the resident communicated his fears and intent to leave, including calling his son and law enforcement, claiming he was under attack and needed evacuation. The facility was notified of these incidents, yet failed to take appropriate action to prevent the resident from leaving unsupervised. Staff members, including the DON and other nursing staff, did not communicate the resident's change in condition or the need for increased supervision, resulting in a lack of coordinated response to the resident's acute behavioral changes. Ultimately, the resident was able to exit the facility without intervention from staff, despite being seen outside by multiple employees. The lack of a clear policy on resident supervision outdoors and the failure to recognize the resident's elopement risk contributed to the resident's ability to leave the premises. Tragically, the resident was later found deceased, highlighting the severe consequences of the facility's failure to provide adequate supervision and intervention for a vulnerable resident.
Failure to Investigate Elopement Risk Leads to Resident's Death
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to thoroughly investigate an elopement incident involving Resident #999, who was one of three residents reviewed for elopement. The resident, diagnosed with Bipolar disorder and paranoia, expressed to his son and law enforcement his intent to leave the facility, believing he was under attack. Despite these warnings, the facility did not reassess the resident's elopement risk or update his care plan with nonpharmacological interventions to ensure his safety. On the day of the incident, the resident was reported missing, and later found deceased in a parking lot half a mile from the facility. The facility's investigation into the incident was inadequate, as it did not address the failure to reassess the resident's risk for elopement following the onset of paranoid behavior. The facility's systemic corrective actions were insufficient, lacking documentation of behaviors and appropriate actions to ensure resident safety with the onset of new behaviors that could lead to elopement. The facility's Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) program failed to identify and address these deficiencies, creating a likelihood of unsafe wandering and elopement among cognitively impaired residents. Interviews with the Director of Nursing (DON) and the Administrator revealed that the facility did not recognize the resident as an elopement risk, despite alerts from the resident's son and law enforcement. The DON admitted that the resident's risk for elopement was not re-evaluated, and the care plan was not updated. The facility's failure to implement effective corrective actions and adequately supervise the resident contributed to the incident, resulting in a determination of isolated ongoing Immediate Jeopardy.
Facility Fails to Maintain Sanitary and Safe Environment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain a safe, clean, and comfortable environment for residents across all observed units. During an initial tour, several deficiencies were noted, including improperly stored bedpans and urinals on the floor of shared bathrooms, holes and missing tiles in walls, rusted and dirty faucets, and unlabeled personal items scattered in shared spaces. Additionally, food crumbs, garbage, and rust-covered furniture were observed in resident rooms, along with dead insects and dirt accumulation in various areas, including the memory care dining room and the secured unit's refrigerator. Further observations revealed issues with the facility's equipment and storage practices. The ice machine in the memory care unit kitchen area was covered in a white film and rust, with a water collection tray and waterspout showing signs of neglect. Expired milk was found in the refrigerator, and the bottom of the freezer contained a dried yellow substance. The Director of Nursing acknowledged the lack of a policy for storing personal items, although staff had been recently educated on proper storage practices. These findings indicate a widespread failure to ensure a sanitary and homelike environment for residents.
Medication Storage and Administration Deficiency
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure medications were stored securely and administered properly, as observed during a survey. In one instance, a resident had a potassium pill left in a clear plastic medication cup on her bedside table, which she was waiting for someone to break in half. The resident did not have an order to self-administer medications, and the Unit Manager RN confirmed that the pill should not have been left with the resident. In another instance, an Albuterol Sulfate inhaler was found unattended on a bedside table while the resident was not in the room. The resident had not been assessed to self-administer the medication and had no physician order to do so. Additionally, a round orange pill was found on the floor outside a room, and a large white pill was observed on the floor of the Ford unit near the sitting room entrance. Despite being informed of the pill on the floor, a housekeeper did not attempt to remove it, and the Unit Manager RN had to be notified to remove it. These observations indicate a failure to adhere to the facility's medication administration policy, which requires medications to be administered safely and not left unattended or improperly stored.
Ineffective Pest Control Program in LTC Facility
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program, resulting in a sanitary environment compromised by pests across all observed units. During an initial facility tour, live crawling insects were found in cups within the secured memory care unit, and dead insects were observed in various locations, including resident rooms and common areas. Photographic evidence was obtained to document these findings. Residents reported frequent sightings of large crawling insects, often referred to as 'waterbugs,' in their rooms and common areas, with some residents noting that insects had even contaminated their food and personal spaces. The facility's pest control policy, revised in November 2019, assigns the Maintenance Department the responsibility of coordinating pest control with an external company. Despite monthly visits from the pest control company and the application of insecticide around the building's foundation, the facility's pest sighting logs from July to December 2024 documented ongoing pest issues. Interviews with residents and staff revealed that while some residents reported pest sightings to staff, others did not, assuming staff were already aware. The Maintenance Director confirmed the presence of pest logbooks at nursing stations and stated that the pest control company reviews these logs during their visits. However, there was no proactive inspection by maintenance staff to identify pest issues within the facility.
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.



