Pompano Health And Rehabilitation Center
Inspection history, citations, penalties and survey trends for this long-term care facility in Pompano Beach, Florida.
- Location
- 51 W Sample Road, Pompano Beach, Florida 33064
- CMS Provider Number
- 105572
- Inspections on file
- 20
- Latest survey
- January 14, 2026
- Citations (last 12 mo.)
- 23
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Pompano Health And Rehabilitation Center during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident with moderate cognitive impairment, dependent for ADLs, was sent to the hospital after a fall. The POA reported being told by a UM that the facility would handle the resident’s return transport and call back, but no follow-up occurred and the POA paid $150 for transportation. Staff interviews revealed conflicting understandings of who was responsible for arranging and paying for the return. The POA also received a consolidated bill covering several prior months and requested a fully itemized statement with clear explanations of services. The BOM emailed a non-itemized bill, was unaware of the itemization request, and had no further contact with the POA, leaving the billing grievance unresolved.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment had medical records that contained repeated documentation errors, including male genitalia assessments for a female and incorrect foley catheter status. The NP also failed to communicate significant clinical findings to the resident's representative, resulting in records not maintained according to professional standards.
A resident with multiple medical conditions did not have a current physician order for a right upper access device following re-admission, and the dressing on the device was not changed or documented as changed according to facility policy. The outdated dressing was observed during survey, and staff confirmed it had not been changed as required. Documentation in the MAR and TAR was incomplete, and there was no nursing note describing the site status or skin condition under the dressing.
A resident with multiple medical conditions and severe cognitive impairment did not have a current physician order for a right upper access device, and the dressing on the device was not changed or documented as required by facility policy. The outdated dressing was observed during survey, and staff acknowledged the lapse in following protocol and documentation.
Surveyors found that the facility did not post the current date on Nurse Staffing Information forms in two observed areas, as required. Staff explained that the process relied on the night nurse to update postings at midnight, but the previous day's forms remained displayed. The Administrator and DON confirmed the requirement for daily, current postings.
Surveyors found that the facility did not post the current date on Nurse Staffing Information forms in two observed areas, leaving outdated staffing data visible. Staff interviews confirmed that the process for updating postings was not followed, and both the Administrator and DON acknowledged the requirement for daily updates was not met.
The facility failed to provide a safe, clean, and homelike environment in one of its wings. Persistent offensive urine-like odors were noted in Resident #67's room and the hallway between rooms 60 to 62. Despite cleaning efforts, the issue remained unresolved, impacting the comfort and safety of the residents.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment was found with a bruise around her right eye, but the facility failed to document and investigate the injury as required by their Abuse Prevention Program policy. Staff interviews revealed inconsistencies in reporting and documentation of the incident.
The facility failed to initiate comprehensive care plans with measurable objectives and interventions for two residents on psychotropic medications. One resident's care plan did not address multiple psychotropic medications, while another's care plan failed to include an antipsychotic medication. Staff interviews confirmed these omissions.
A facility failed to follow wound care protocols and ensure an air loss mattress was functioning for a resident with severe cognitive impairment and multiple diagnoses, including a sacral pressure ulcer. An LPN did not change gloves between cleaning the resident's bottom and applying treatment to the wound, and the air loss mattress was found turned off, with staff unaware of how long it had been off.
The facility failed to provide proper catheter care for a resident with severe cognitive impairment and multiple medical conditions. The resident had an incorrect catheter size, an undated urinary drainage bag, and the catheter tubing was not anchored. Additionally, the drainage bag was placed on the bed during care, contrary to standard practice. Staff interviews confirmed these improper practices, leading to deficiencies in the resident's care.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment experienced significant weight loss due to the facility's failure to provide timely nutritional interventions. Despite recommendations for fortified cereal and nutritional supplements, no follow-up assessments were conducted, and the resident's weight continued to decline.
The facility failed to ensure accurate reconciliation and documentation of controlled substances and other medications for multiple residents. Issues included administering medications without valid orders, discrepancies between the Controlled Drug Declining Inventory Sheet and the MAR, improper disposal of controlled substances, and unavailability of prescribed medications.
The facility failed to address PRN psychotropic medications with no stop date in a timely manner for three residents on hospice care, leading to non-compliance with the facility's policy requiring discontinuation or documented rationale for continued use beyond 14 days.
The facility failed to maintain medications and medication carts in a secure and sanitary manner. Staff left medication carts unlocked and unattended, and expired eye drops and loose pills were found in the carts. The facility's policies on medication storage and administration were not followed.
The facility failed to follow their menus to meet the nutritional needs of the residents. Corned beef served on a regular diet plate was only 1 ounce instead of the 3 ounces specified in the menu, affecting 40 residents.
The facility failed to provide correct food choices and preferences for three residents. One resident did not receive the protein listed on her breakfast tray, another did not get salad dressing, and a third did not receive fortified pudding or a mighty shake as specified on their meal tickets. Interviews revealed that while tray audits are conducted, discrepancies in meal delivery still occurred.
The facility failed to adhere to the fluid restriction for a resident with ESRD on dialysis. The resident was observed with more fluids than prescribed and water at the bedside, contrary to physician's orders and the care plan. Staff interviews indicated a lapse in communication and protocol adherence.
The facility failed to adhere to professional standards for food service safety, including improper storage, labeling, and handling of food, as well as poor hygiene practices by staff. Observations included open garbage cans, debris on the floor, improperly labeled food containers, and a dietary aide plating food with bare hands without washing them.
Failure to Resolve Grievances Related to Transportation and Billing
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to honor a resident representative’s grievances regarding transportation and billing. The resident, who had moderate cognitive impairment and required substantial to maximal assistance with ADLs, was sent to the hospital via 911 after a fall on 12/04/25. The resident’s POA reported that when the hospital contacted her about returning the resident to the facility, she called the facility and was told by the Unit Manager not to worry and that the facility would handle the transportation and call her back. The POA did not receive a follow-up call and ultimately paid $150.00 for the resident’s return transport. Interviews later showed differing understandings among staff: the UM stated she believed hospitals usually arrange return transportation and reported being told the resident’s insurance would not cover it, while the DON and Admissions Coordinator stated that Admissions is responsible for arranging returns and that, for this long-term care resident, the facility should have paid regardless of insurance. The facility also failed to adequately address the POA’s grievance regarding billing. The POA received a bill in November 2025 that included charges from August, September, and October and requested a complete itemized billing statement from the start of the resident’s stay, including a clear explanation of services rendered. The grievance record dated 12/16/25 documented this request. The Business Office Manager reported speaking with the POA by phone and emailing a copy of the bill on 11/19/25, but the attached billing statement was not itemized as requested. The BOM stated she was not aware that an itemized bill had been requested and confirmed she had no further contact with the POA after sending the non-itemized bill, leaving the POA’s specific grievance about itemization unresolved.
Inaccurate Medical Record Documentation and Communication Failure
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain accurate and professionally documented medical records for one resident. The resident, who had a history of traumatic cerebral hemorrhage and severe cognitive impairment (BIMS score of 4), was admitted and later readmitted to the facility. The clinical record showed discrepancies in documentation, including a physician order for foley catheter removal and a treatment administration record indicating the catheter was removed. However, subsequent urology nurse practitioner (NP) consult notes repeatedly documented male genitalia assessments for a female resident and indicated the presence of a foley catheter after it had been removed. The NP confirmed during interviews that these entries were incorrect and that the resident was female, acknowledging that the male-specific information should not have been included. Additionally, the NP stated that he had not communicated with the resident's family or representative regarding significant findings, such as a right kidney mass identified on ultrasound, despite the resident's severe cognitive impairment. The NP admitted that he typically only contacts family if the resident is alert and did not reach out to the family or representative in this case. These actions and omissions resulted in medical records that were not accurately documented in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices.
Failure to Maintain Current Physician Order and Timely Dressing Change for Access Device
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to obtain a current physician order and did not change the dressing on a resident's right upper access device as required by policy and physician orders. Review of the facility's policy indicated that central access device dressings must be changed every seven days or sooner if compromised, and that a sterile dressing must be maintained. However, for one resident, there was no current physician order for the right upper access device following re-admission, and the dressing was not changed or documented as changed for an extended period. The last documented order for the dressing change had been discontinued, and there was no updated order upon the resident's re-admission. Observations revealed that the dressing on the resident's right Opti Flow port double lumen was outdated, and staff confirmed it had not been changed as required. Documentation in the Medication Administration Record (MAR) and Treatment Administration Record (TAR) was inconsistent or missing regarding dressing changes, and there was no nursing progress note describing the site status or skin condition under the outdated dressing. The DON acknowledged that the dressing should have been changed and a current physician order should have been in place, as per protocol.
Plan Of Correction
1.) Resident #4's access change was completed per Physician's order. The Attending Physician was notified, care plan was added, and an assessment was completed by RN Unit Manager, with no negative effects noted. 2.) Full house audit of residents with access site and skin checks were completed by the Director of Nursing/Designee and no other concerns identified. 3.) Licensed Nurses educated by Director of Nursing/Designee on providing adequate care and services in accordance with accepted professional standards to include following Physicians' orders, changing of access, and the components of regulation F694/N201. 4.) Director of Nursing/Designee will conduct random audits to ensure access are changed per physician's order twice weekly for four weeks, then weekly for four weeks then monthly for three months to ensure compliance. Findings of audits to be reported through the monthly Quality Assessment, Assurance and Compliance Committee meeting for three months for comments and recommendations.
Failure to Maintain Current Orders and Timely Dressing Changes for Access Device
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to obtain a current physician order and did not change the dressing on a resident's right upper access device as required by policy and physician orders. The policy specified that central access device dressings must be changed every seven days or sooner if compromised, and that a current physician order should be maintained. However, review of the resident's records revealed there was no current physician order for the right upper access device following the resident's re-admission. Additionally, the dressing on the resident's right Opti Flow port double lumen was observed to be outdated, and documentation did not show that it had been changed or assessed as required. The resident involved had multiple diagnoses, including conditions affecting the right dominant side, type II diabetes, and hypertensive heart disease, and was noted to have severe cognitive impairment. Observations confirmed the outdated dressing, and interviews with nursing staff and the DON acknowledged that the dressing had not been changed or documented according to protocol. There was also a lack of documentation in the care plan and treatment records regarding the site status or condition of the skin under the dressing.
Plan Of Correction
1.) Resident #4's access change was completed per Physician's order. The Attending Physician was notified, the care plan was added, and an assessment was completed by RN Unit Manager, with no negative effects noted. 2.) Full house audit of residents with access site and skin checks were completed by the Director of Nursing/Designee and no other concerns identified. 3.) Licensed Nurses educated by Director of Nursing/Designee on providing adequate care and services in accordance with accepted professional standards to include following Physicians' orders, changing of access, and the components of regulation F694/N201. 4.) Director of Nursing/Designee will conduct random audits to ensure access are changed per physician's order twice weekly for four weeks, then weekly for four weeks then monthly for three months to ensure compliance. Findings of audits to be reported through the monthly Quality Assessment, Assurance and Compliance Committee meeting for three months for comments and recommendations. F 694 F 694
Failure to Post Current Nurse Staffing Information
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that the daily Nurse Staffing Information was posted with the current date in two of five observed posting areas. During an entrance tour, surveyors observed that the 'Nursing Staff Posting Form' at both the front desk and the main hallway bulletin board displayed outdated dates, despite the form itself indicating it should be updated daily. Photographic evidence was obtained to document these findings. Interviews with staff revealed that the Staffing Coordinator prepared the next day's staffing form in advance and placed it behind the current day's form, with the expectation that the night nurse would update the posting at midnight. However, on the day of the survey, the previous day's forms remained posted in both observed areas. Both the Administrator and the DON acknowledged that the Nurse Staffing Information Form is required to be posted daily with the current date.
Plan Of Correction
1.) Staff posting was completed by the Staffing Coordinator, the Resident Council President was notified, and no additional recommendations were provided on behalf of the resident council committee. 2.) A full house audit of staff posting areas was completed by the Nursing Home Administrator, and staff posting was updated. A resident council meeting was held; no residents were affected by this. 3.) Staffing coordinator educated by the Nursing Home Administrator/Designee on updating the staff posting throughout the facility each day, and the components of regulation F732/N066. 4.) Nursing Home Administrator/Designee will conduct random audits to ensure staff posting is current, accurate, and visible to the residents twice weekly for four weeks, then weekly for four weeks then monthly for three months to ensure compliance. Findings of audits to be reported through the monthly Quality Assessment, Assurance and Compliance Committee meeting for three months for comments and recommendations.
Failure to Post Current Nurse Staffing Information
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that the current date was posted on the Nurse Staffing Information forms in two of five observed posting areas. During an entrance tour, surveyors observed that the 'Nursing Staff Posting Form' at the front desk and in the main hallway near the conference room displayed outdated information, as confirmed by photographic evidence. The forms are required to be updated daily with the current date, but the previous day's forms remained posted in both locations. Interviews with staff revealed that the staffing coordinator would prepare the next day's posting in advance and place it behind the current day's form, with the expectation that the night nurse would switch the postings at midnight. However, this process was not followed, resulting in outdated staffing information being displayed. Both the Administrator and the DON acknowledged that the Nurse Staffing Information Form must be posted daily with the current date, but this requirement was not met at the time of the survey.
Plan Of Correction
1.) Staff posting was completed by the Staffing Coordinator, the Resident Council President was notified, and no additional recommendations were provided on behalf of the resident council committee. 2.) A full house audit of staff posting areas was completed by the Nursing Home Administrator, and staff posting was updated. A resident council meeting was held; no residents were affected by this. 3.) Staffing coordinator educated by the Nursing Home Administrator/Designee on updating the staff posting throughout the facility each day, and the components of regulation F732/N066. 4.) Nursing Home Administrator/Designee will conduct random audits to ensure staff posting is current, accurate, and visible to the residents twice weekly for four weeks, then weekly for four weeks then monthly for three months to ensure compliance. Findings of audits to be reported through the monthly Quality Assessment, Assurance and Compliance Committee meeting for three months for comments and recommendations.
Failure to Maintain a Clean and Homelike Environment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment for one of its wings, specifically the [NAME] wing. On 05/28/24, an observation in Resident #67's room revealed an offensive urine-like odor. Both the Housekeeping Manager and District Housekeeping Manager acknowledged the odor during a side-by-side observation. The Housekeeping Manager mentioned that CNAs inform them when rooms have odors, and they use deodorizers and clean the rooms as necessary. The District Housekeeping Manager stated that they were aware of other rooms with similar issues and would add Resident #67's room to their focus cleaning list. Additionally, on 05/30/24, an overwhelming smell of urine was noted in the hallway between rooms 60 to 62. Staff E, a CNA, mentioned that Resident #67 often urinates on the floor, and she covers it with a sheet before calling housekeeping to clean it up. The District Manager of Housekeeping, who has worked for the company for [AGE] years, acknowledged the strong urine-like odor in the hallway and attributed it to the incontinence and behavior issues of the residents in those rooms. He mentioned that housekeeping cleans the rooms several times a day using enzyme cleaners. The Housekeeping Manager, with five years of experience at the facility, also acknowledged the ongoing issue and stated that they clean the affected resident rooms at least three times a day. Despite these efforts, the facility failed to maintain a safe, clean, and homelike environment in the [NAME] wing, as evidenced by the persistent offensive odors.
Failure to Document and Investigate Injury of Unknown Origin
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to properly document and thoroughly investigate an injury of unknown origin for a resident with severe cognitive impairment. The resident was observed with a bruise around her right eye, but there was no documentation of a fall event or report of the bruise in the nurse progress notes or weekly skin assessments. The resident could not recall the cause of the bruise, and staff interviews revealed inconsistencies in reporting and documentation of the incident. The Director of Nursing (DON) and other staff members acknowledged that the incident was not documented or reported as required by the facility's Abuse Prevention Program policy. The floor nurse who discovered the resident's injury did not file an incident report or document the event in the nurse progress notes. Additionally, the Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) on duty at the time of the incident did not document the event or follow up on the injury. Interviews with various staff members, including the Unit Manager, Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON), and another LPN, revealed a lack of communication and proper documentation regarding the resident's injury. The facility's failure to document and investigate the injury of unknown origin is a deficiency in their compliance with the Abuse Prevention Program policy, which requires thorough investigation and appropriate reporting of such incidents.
Failure to Develop Comprehensive Care Plans for Psychotropic Medications
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to initiate a comprehensive care plan for psychotropic medications with measurable objectives and interventions for two residents. Resident #40, who was admitted with diagnoses including Generalized Anxiety Disorder, Depression, Chronic Pain Syndrome, and Paraplegia, was on multiple psychotropic medications such as Morphine Sulfate, Duloxetine HCl, and Alprazolam. Despite the physician's orders for monitoring side effects, the care plan for Resident #40 did not include measurable objectives and interventions for these medications. This was confirmed during an interview with the Clinical Record Director, who acknowledged the omission in the care plan. Similarly, Resident #63, who was admitted with diagnoses including Dementia, Psychosis, and a history of falls, was prescribed Olanzapine for Psychosis. The care plan for Resident #63 included monitoring for side effects of antianxiety medication but failed to address the antipsychotic medication. Interviews with care plan coordinators and the Director of Nursing confirmed that the care plan should have been updated to reflect the use of Olanzapine. Both cases highlight the facility's failure to develop and implement comprehensive care plans for residents on psychotropic medications.
Failure to Follow Wound Care Protocols and Ensure Functioning Equipment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that residents receive wound care consistent with professional standards of practice for a resident with severe cognitive impairment and multiple diagnoses, including a sacral pressure ulcer. During an observation, it was noted that the resident's air loss mattress, which was supposed to be on, was turned off, and staff were unaware of how long it had been off. This is critical as the mattress is part of the resident's care plan to manage the pressure ulcer. Additionally, the wound care procedure performed by an LPN was not in compliance with the facility's protocol. The LPN did not change gloves between cleaning the resident's bottom and applying treatment to the wound, which is against the documented procedure for clean dressing changes and could lead to contamination and infection. The LPN admitted to not following the protocol due to nervousness in the presence of a supervisor. The DON was informed of these findings and acknowledged the issue. The resident involved had a significant medical history, including cachexia, adult failure to thrive, peripheral vascular diseases, and chronic pain syndrome. The resident was dependent on staff for most activities of daily living, including personal care. The failure to follow proper wound care procedures and ensure the air loss mattress was functioning as required directly impacted the resident's care. The facility's documented procedures for wound care were not adhered to, leading to potential risks for the resident's health and well-being.
Improper Catheter Care and Handling
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure proper indwelling catheter care for a resident with severe cognitive impairment and multiple medical conditions, including obstructive uropathy and chronic kidney disease. The resident's care plan specified the use of a 16 French catheter with a 10 cc balloon, and the physician's order required the urinary drainage bag to be labeled with the date. However, observations revealed that the resident had an 18 French catheter with a 30 cc balloon, and the urinary drainage bag was not dated. Additionally, the catheter tubing was not anchored to the resident's thigh, and the drainage bag was placed on top of the bed during care, which is against standard practice to prevent urinary tract infections. The resident's urine was observed to be cloudy, indicating potential infection or improper care. Staff interviews confirmed that the catheter tubing was not consistently anchored, and the urinary drainage bag was improperly handled during care. The staff member performing the care admitted to placing the drainage bag on the bed, which is not recommended as it can lead to infections. The unit manager acknowledged the issues but did not provide a consistent rationale for the improper practices. The resident's severe cognitive impairment limited their ability to communicate effectively, further emphasizing the need for diligent and proper care by the staff. The facility's failure to adhere to the care plan and physician's orders, along with improper handling of the catheter and drainage bag, led to the identified deficiencies in the resident's care.
Failure to Provide Timely Nutritional Interventions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide timely nutritional interventions for a resident with severe cognitive impairment. The resident, who was admitted with diagnoses including Dementia and Psychosis, experienced a significant weight loss over several months. Despite recommendations from the clinical dietitian for fortified cereal and nutritional supplements, there was no follow-up nutritional assessment after the initial evaluation in January. The resident's weight continued to decline, and no further assessments or interventions were documented to address this issue. The clinical dietitian acknowledged that the quarterly follow-up assessment for the resident was missed due to an error in the electronic system. The resident's meal intake records showed inconsistent consumption, with some meals being consumed at less than 50%. The lack of timely reassessment and intervention contributed to the resident's continued weight loss, highlighting a deficiency in the facility's nutritional care processes.
Medication Management and Documentation Deficiencies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure accurate reconciliation of controlled substance medications for several residents. For Resident #48, the facility did not renew a physician's order for Ativan, leading to the administration of the medication without a valid order. Additionally, the Controlled Drug Declining Inventory Sheet did not match the Medication Administration Record (MAR) for multiple dates, indicating discrepancies in documentation. Similar issues were observed for Resident #82, where the administration of Lorazepam was not properly documented on the MAR, despite being removed from the controlled substances box. The DON acknowledged these discrepancies during a side-by-side review of the records. Resident #93 received Alprazolam without a valid physician's order for several months. The Controlled Drug Declining Inventory Sheet and the MAR did not match, indicating that the medication was administered without proper documentation. The DON admitted that the psychotropic medication was missed during their regular meetings and that the medication was given without a valid order. For Resident #117, the facility failed to properly document the disposal of Lorazepam tablets, as the required two nurse signatures were missing. Additionally, the MAR did not reflect the administration of the medication on several dates, despite it being removed from the controlled substances box. Resident #83 did not receive their prescribed Zofran medication for nausea and vomiting due to it not being available. The resident reported missing the medication for a couple of days, which was confirmed by the MAR and interviews with staff. Lastly, Resident #6 did not receive their prescribed Bupropion medication, although the MAR was signed as if it had been administered. These deficiencies highlight significant issues in medication management and documentation within the facility, affecting multiple residents and various types of medications.
Failure to Address PRN Psychotropic Medications Timely
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to address physician-ordered 'As Needed' (PRN) psychotropic medications that had 'no stop date' in a timely manner for three residents. The facility's policy required PRN antipsychotic medications to be discontinued after 14 days unless the prescriber documented the rationale for continued use. However, this policy was not followed for Residents #48, #82, and #99, all of whom were on hospice care and had PRN orders for Lorazepam without a stop date or proper documentation for continued use beyond 14 days. Resident #99 was admitted with severe cognitive impairment and multiple diagnoses, including dementia and anxiety disorder. The resident had PRN orders for Lorazepam, both oral and injectable, which were administered multiple times without a stop date or documented rationale for continued use. Despite pharmacy recommendations to evaluate the need for continued PRN use, the physician's response indicated that medications were managed by hospice, and no further action was taken to comply with the facility's policy. Resident #48, who had severe cognitive impairment and was dependent on staff for daily activities, also had a PRN order for Lorazepam without a stop date. The medication was administered multiple times beyond the 14-day limit without a renewed physician order. Similarly, Resident #82, with severe cognitive impairment and multiple diagnoses, had a PRN order for Lorazepam via G-tube, which was administered beyond the 14-day limit without a renewed order. Interviews with staff, including the Director of Nursing and a Licensed Practical Nurse, revealed a misunderstanding that hospice care exempted residents from the 14-day limit for PRN psychotropic medications, leading to non-compliance with the facility's policy.
Medication Storage and Security Deficiencies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain medications and medication carts in a secure and sanitary manner. During a medication administration observation, a staff member left a medication cart unlocked and unattended for approximately 7 minutes while speaking to another staff member. There were residents and staff members passing by the unlocked cart during this time. In another instance, a medication cart was found unattended and unlocked outside a resident's room. The staff member responsible for the cart acknowledged leaving it unlocked but was unsure how it happened. Additionally, an expired eye drop bottle was found in a medication cart, which had been removed from a resident's room but not disposed of properly. Loose pills were also found in the medication carts during reviews, which staff members acknowledged should not have been there. The facility's policies on medication storage and administration were not followed, leading to these deficiencies. The policies require medications to be stored properly and medication carts to be kept closed and locked when out of sight of the medication nurse. The facility's Director of Nursing was informed of these findings. The observations and interviews revealed lapses in maintaining the security and sanitation of medication carts, as well as the proper disposal of expired medications.
Failure to Follow Menu Nutritional Requirements
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to follow their menus to meet the nutritional needs of the residents. During an observation in the main kitchen, it was found that the corned beef served on a regular diet plate was only 1 ounce, instead of the 3 ounces specified in the facility's menu. The Food Service Manager instructed the cook to place two pieces of corned beef on each plate, which still did not meet the required 3 ounces. This discrepancy was confirmed through interviews and record reviews, affecting 40 residents on a regular diet out of a total census of 124 residents.
Failure to Provide Correct Food Choices and Preferences
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide food choices and preferences for three residents during dining observations. Resident #28, who had an intact cognitive status, reported that her meal trays often contained incorrect food items. During an observation, her breakfast tray was missing the hard-boiled eggs listed on the meal ticket, leaving her without a protein option. Resident #64, also cognitively intact, did not receive salad dressing with her green salad as indicated on her meal ticket, resulting in her not eating the salad. Resident #110, with an intact cognitive status, did not receive fortified pudding or a mighty shake as specified on her meal ticket during lunch observation. Interviews with the facility's Registered Dietitian and Food Service Manager revealed that while tray audits are periodically conducted to ensure meal ticket accuracy, the Registered Dietitian is not present daily. The Food Service Manager stated that there is a designated person at the end of the tray line responsible for ensuring the food items match the printed meal tickets. Despite these measures, discrepancies in meal delivery were observed, leading to the deficiencies noted in the report.
Failure to Adhere to Fluid Restriction for Dialysis Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide the correct fluid restriction for a resident with End-Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) who was dependent on dialysis. The physician's orders specified a fluid restriction of 720 milliliters (ml) per day, with no water to be left at the bedside. However, during an observation, the resident was found with a lunch tray containing 24 ounces of fluids instead of the prescribed 8 ounces. Additionally, later in the day, the resident was observed with 16 ounces of water at the bedside, contrary to the physician's orders and care plan. The resident, who had moderate cognitive impairment, was unaware of her fluid restriction. Interviews with staff revealed that Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs) were responsible for providing water to residents and were supposed to check the electronic system for any fluid restrictions. The Registered Nurse stated that the nurse assigned to the resident would also inform the CNAs about any fluid restrictions. Despite this, the resident received more fluids than prescribed, indicating a failure in communication and adherence to the care plan. The CNA interviewed was aware of the fluid restriction but did not provide the extra water, suggesting a lapse in protocol by another staff member.
Food Service Safety Deficiencies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. During an initial visit to the main kitchen, several concerns were observed, including open garbage cans in the food production area, debris and dirt on the floor around the food production area and behind the stove, and improperly labeled or dated food containers in the reach-in refrigerator. The internal temperatures of the reach-in refrigerator were also noted to be above the recommended 40 degrees Fahrenheit, with readings of 51 and 55 degrees Fahrenheit. Additionally, the walk-in refrigerator contained food items that were past their used-by dates, including ravioli and ground beef, and a plastic container labeled beef with a preparation and used-by date of the same day. The dry storage area had boxes of food items placed on the floor, which is against food safety standards. Furthermore, a dietary aide was observed working on the breakfast tray line and plating food items with bare hands. The aide then adjusted his glasses and continued plating food without washing his hands first. These observations were communicated to the Food Service Manager during an interview. The facility's failure to adhere to professional standards for food service safety was evident in the improper storage, labeling, and handling of food, as well as the lack of proper hygiene practices by staff.
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.



