Silver Oaks Health Campus
Inspection history, citations, penalties and survey trends for this long-term care facility in Columbus, Indiana.
- Location
- 2011 Chapa Street, Columbus, Indiana 47203
- CMS Provider Number
- 155693
- Inspections on file
- 26
- Latest survey
- February 10, 2026
- Citations (last 12 mo.)
- 1
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Silver Oaks Health Campus during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident with dementia and osteoporosis was given another resident’s evening medications when a QMA, distracted while using a medication cart for the first time, mixed up two cups of pills for residents in nearby rooms and failed to follow the facility’s five-rights medication policy. The resident, who was ordered cholesterol and dementia medications at bedtime, instead received another resident’s seizure and diabetic medications, and a family member also reported that staff had previously attempted to perform a blood sugar test on this non-diabetic resident that was intended for a different patient.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment and dependent on staff for care fell from bed during a dressing change, resulting in a tibia/fibula fracture. The fall occurred as the resident was on an air mattress without side rails, and staff were not present on both sides of the bed. The facility lacked a specific policy for turning residents, contributing to the incident.
A resident with quadriplegia sustained a second-degree burn on the left foot after a CNA, who was not trained in using a blow dryer for foot care, dried the resident's feet at the resident's request. The CNA was unaware that the resident could not feel her feet, leading to redness and blisters. The facility's policy on change in condition and the risks associated with heating appliances for residents with paralysis were not adequately addressed.
A resident was served a meal that did not comply with her prescribed mechanical soft diet. Despite the meal ticket indicating the correct diet, the resident received a regular diet meal. The error was confirmed by the RN, Speech Therapist, and Dietary Manager, highlighting a lapse in following dietary orders.
A resident did not receive the prescribed 2 mg dose of Coumadin from 04/26/24 through 04/28/24, despite physician orders. Interviews with nursing staff revealed a lack of clarity and communication regarding the medication orders, and the facility's medication administration policy was not followed.
The facility failed to provide adequate bathing for two dependent residents, who were severely cognitively impaired and had multiple diagnoses. Resident C received only 6 out of 20 scheduled showers or complete bed baths, while Resident D received only 7 out of 11 scheduled showers or complete bed baths. Staff interviews and record reviews revealed significant gaps in the provision and documentation of bathing, contrary to the facility's policies.
The facility failed to hold a resident's blood pressure medication when the heart rate was below the physician's hold parameters. Despite instructions to hold the medication if the heart rate was less than 60, the resident received the medication on multiple occasions when the heart rate was below this threshold.
The facility failed to identify and document a resident's pressure ulcers in a timely manner. The resident, who was at high risk for pressure ulcers, revealed sores on his bottom that were not present upon admission. Staff interviews indicated a lack of communication and awareness regarding the resident's wounds, and the facility's policy on skin observation was not followed.
Wrong-Resident Medication Administration Due to Failure to Follow Five Rights
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves a failure to follow the facility’s medication administration guidelines, specifically the five rights of medication administration, resulting in a resident receiving another resident’s medications. A family member reported that while visiting Resident D, a staff member attempted to perform a blood sugar test related to insulin use, even though Resident D was not diabetic and had never been on insulin; the family member stopped the staff member from performing the test. Later, the same family member was notified that Resident D had received the wrong medications. Resident D’s clinical record showed moderate cognitive impairment with diagnoses including osteoporosis and dementia, and the EMAR indicated that at the 9:00 P.M. medication pass the resident was to receive atorvastatin, donepezil, and Zetia. During an interview, QMA 2 stated that on the night in question she was using the 200 Hall medication cart for the first time and was distracted by another resident talking to her while at the cart. She had two cups of pills prepared, one with two medications and one with three medications, for residents in nearby rooms, Resident D and Resident E. After administering medications to Resident D, she realized at the cart that she had given Resident D Resident E’s 9:00 P.M. medications instead of Resident D’s ordered medications. Resident E’s EMAR showed that the 9:00 P.M. medications included Keppra 500 mg and metformin 1000 mg, each ordered twice daily between 6:00 A.M.–10:00 A.M. and 6:00 P.M.–10:00 P.M. The facility’s written policy required verification of the right resident, right drug, right dose, right route, and right time with a triple check at three steps in the preparation process, which was not followed in this incident.
Failure to Prevent Resident Fall Resulting in Fracture
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to prevent a fall during care that resulted in a fracture for a resident who was severely cognitively impaired and dependent on staff assistance for all care. The resident was lying on an air mattress without side rails or grab bars, and the bed was positioned by the door. During a dressing change, the resident rolled off the bed between the wall and the bed, resulting in a bruise and skin tear on the right forearm. Initially, first aid was applied, and the resident showed no immediate signs of pain or discomfort. Subsequent observations revealed discoloration and warmth in the resident's right shin, leading to an x-ray that confirmed an acute distal tibia/fibula fracture. The resident was then sent to the emergency room for splinting and later returned to the facility with instructions to remain non-weight bearing and to follow up with an orthopedic surgeon. Interviews with staff indicated that the air mattress was set to a firm setting during the dressing change, which may have contributed to the instability that led to the fall. The facility lacked a specific policy for turning residents in bed, and staff were trained to turn residents side to side based on the type of care being provided. The incident highlighted a failure to maintain a hazard-free environment and implement preventative measures, as outlined in the facility's Fall Management Program Guidelines. The deficiency was identified as part of a complaint investigation.
Removal Plan
- Educate nurses and aides on turning and repositioning resident dependent on staff.
- Educate staff on accident hazards related to air mattress, bed mobility, and falls.
- Conduct return demonstration of proper rolling/turning/repositioning techniques.
Resident Sustains Second-Degree Burn Due to Improper Foot Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure a resident did not acquire a burn during care, resulting in Resident B sustaining a second-degree burn on the left foot. Resident B, who was cognitively intact and had diagnoses including traumatic spinal cord dysfunction and quadriplegia, required extensive staff assistance with all ADLs. The resident's clinical record lacked documentation of an order or care plan related to the use of a blow dryer to dry the resident's feet. On the day of the incident, CNA 2, who had not been trained on using a blow dryer on the resident's feet, dried Resident B's feet at the resident's request. The resident's left foot became red, and blisters later formed, leading to a diagnosis of second-degree burns on the left toes by the wound center. Interviews revealed that the CNA was unaware that the resident could not feel her feet, and the facility's policy on notification of change in condition was not adequately followed in this case. The incident was documented in progress notes and interviews with the resident, CNAs, LPN, and NP. The resident had been having her feet dried with a blow dryer for a long time, as recommended by her podiatrist, but this was the first time CNA 2 had assisted her. The CNA noticed the redness after drying the feet and informed LPN 3, who then notified the DON. The resident's condition was monitored, and treatment was provided, but the lack of proper training and awareness among staff contributed to the incident. The facility's policy on change in condition and the risks associated with heating appliances for residents with paralysis were not adequately addressed, leading to the deficiency.
Failure to Follow Resident's Diet Order
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to follow a resident's diet order for a mechanical soft diet. During an observation, Resident C was served a lunch plate that did not comply with her prescribed mechanical soft diet. The meal ticket indicated a mechanical soft diet, but the resident was served a regular diet meal consisting of a slice of ham, cheddar hashbrowns, roasted carrots, and a piece of cake. RN 6 confirmed that the resident's diet order in the clinical record was for a mechanical soft diet, which had not been updated by the kitchen. The Speech Therapist also confirmed that the resident should have been served a mechanical soft meal and ordered the correct diet from the kitchen. The Dietary Manager indicated that the cook working in the 600 Hall kitchen was unfamiliar with the residents' diet orders and that the aides should have checked the meal tickets to ensure the correct diet was served. Resident C's diet order, which started on 04/10/24, indicated a mechanical soft diet with extra gravy and no straws. The resident was severely cognitively impaired and had multiple diagnoses, including metabolic encephalopathy, hypertension, heart failure, diabetes, malnutrition, anxiety, and depression. The resident had episodes of coughing or choking during meals or when swallowing medications and had complaints of difficulty or pain with swallowing. The facility's policy on Resident Dining & Nutritional Preferences emphasized the importance of following dietary orders to meet residents' nutritional needs, but this policy was not adhered to in this instance.
Failure to Follow Physician Orders for Blood Thinner Administration
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to follow physician orders related to the administration of a blood thinner, Coumadin, for a resident. The resident, who was cognitively intact and had diagnoses including fracture, anemia, atrial fibrillation, and hypertension, was observed to be in good condition with no visible bruises or bleeding. However, a review of the clinical records revealed discrepancies in the administration of Coumadin. Specifically, the resident was supposed to receive a 2 mg dose of Coumadin from 04/26/24 through 04/28/24, but this dose was not administered as per the physician's orders. Interviews with the nursing staff, including an RN and the Director of Nursing (DON), indicated a lack of clarity and communication regarding the resident's medication orders. The RN explained the process for obtaining and communicating PT/INR results and coordinating with the physician for any dose changes. Despite this process, the 2 mg dose of Coumadin was not administered as ordered. The DON was unable to explain why the dose was discontinued, despite the order to continue it. The facility's policy on medication administration, which mandates that medications be administered as prescribed, was not followed in this instance.
Failure to Provide Adequate Bathing for Dependent Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide adequate bathing for two dependent residents, Residents C and D, as required by their policies. Resident C, who was severely cognitively impaired and had multiple diagnoses including metabolic encephalopathy, hypertension, heart failure, diabetes, malnutrition, anxiety, and depression, received only 6 out of 20 scheduled showers or complete bed baths since admission. There was only one documented refusal of a scheduled shower or complete bed bath for Resident C. Similarly, Resident D, also severely cognitively impaired with diagnoses including metabolic encephalopathy, anemia, diabetes, and malnutrition, received only 7 out of 11 scheduled showers or complete bed baths from admission until discharge. There was a lack of documentation for one of the scheduled bathing sessions for Resident D. Interviews with facility staff revealed that residents were to be offered showers at least twice a week, with the option for more if requested. The staff were required to document the bathing in the electronic record and fill out a skin sheet after each bath, which was then signed by the nurse and given to the ADON. However, the records for both residents showed significant gaps in the provision and documentation of bathing, indicating a failure to adhere to the facility's policies on bathing and ADL documentation.
Failure to Hold Blood Pressure Medication as Per Physician's Orders
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to hold a resident's blood pressure medication when the resident's heart rate was outside of the physician's hold parameters. Resident E, who was severely cognitively impaired and had diagnoses including senile degeneration of the brain, anemia, diabetes, heart failure, and hypertension, was prescribed metoprolol succinate with instructions to hold the medication if the heart rate was less than 60. Despite this, the medication was administered on multiple occasions when the resident's heart rate was below the specified threshold. The clinical record review revealed that Resident E received the medication on several dates in March and April 2024 when the heart rate was below 60, with the lowest recorded heart rate being 45. During an interview, an LPN confirmed that the heart rate should be checked before administering the medication and that the medication should not be given if the heart rate is outside the parameters, with the Nurse Practitioner being notified in such cases. The facility's policy on medication administration supports this procedure, indicating that medications should be administered according to the prescriber's written orders.
Failure to Identify and Document Pressure Ulcers
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to identify and properly document a pressure ulcer for Resident D, who was at high risk for pressure ulcers. During an observation, the resident revealed sores on his bottom that were not present upon admission. The sores included small open areas on the coccyx and buttocks, which were pink in color with no drainage. The resident's clinical record indicated he was always incontinent of bowel and bladder and had no pressure ulcers at the time of admission. However, the record lacked documentation of the newly observed pressure ulcers. Interviews with staff revealed that the dressing had been removed earlier due to increased bowel movements, and there was a lack of communication among staff regarding the resident's wounds. The Qualified Medication Aide (QMA) and Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) working with the resident were unaware of the wounds. The Wound Care Nurse indicated that she relied on nurses and aides to inform her of any new skin issues, but the staff had not alerted her about the resident's condition before the areas became open wounds. The facility's policy on weekly skin observation required nurses and aides to monitor and report any skin impairments. Despite this policy, the staff failed to identify and document the resident's pressure ulcers in a timely manner. The Wound Care Nurse confirmed that the areas were not present on admission and should have been reported before they became open wounds. This deficiency was related to a complaint investigation.
Latest citations in Indiana
Surveyors found that staff failed to follow physician orders for several residents, including not documenting required physician notification and new insulin orders after a critically high blood glucose, not consistently obtaining or recording ordered daily weights, and administering antihypertensive and midodrine medications despite blood pressure readings outside ordered hold parameters. Documentation on the MAR and related records included unexplained "NA," "X," and blank entries for required weights, and cardiac and BP-related medications were given when systolic blood pressure was below or above specified thresholds, contrary to written orders and facility policy.
Informed consent was not documented before a psychotropic med was started for one resident with dementia and anxiety, and it was not documented before another resident's Vraylar dose was increased for aggression. The DON stated the consent form should be completed before initiation or dose increase, and the facility policy required informed consent before starting or increasing a psychotropic med.
A resident with alcohol abuse, anxiety, and major depressive disorder was transferred to the ER and later planned for transfer to another LTC facility, but no Discharge MDS was completed. The MDS coordinator stated the discharge MDS was not done at discharge and should have been completed within the required timeframe; the facility did not have a resident assessment policy and used RAI criteria for timing.
An MDS assessment failed to accurately reflect a resident's status when an antidepressant prescribed for insomnia was not documented on the admission MDS. The resident had Alzheimer's disease and major depressive disorder, and the MDS coordinator later confirmed the assessment was incorrect.
A resident was observed receiving O2 via nasal cannula on multiple occasions, but the chart had no current physician order for O2. The resident said she had been told after a recent hospitalization to use O2 for 30 days, but that time had passed and she was still using it because staff told her she needed it. The DON confirmed there was no current O2 order; the last order had already been discontinued.
A resident with documented diagnoses of CHF, atherosclerotic heart disease, and pacemaker dependence was admitted with clear record entries noting the presence and use of a cardiac pacemaker, including in the admission evaluation, skin assessment, and a physician note. However, the resident’s care plan did not address the pacemaker at all. The MDS Coordinator acknowledged that the pacemaker should have been care planned, noting that while there is no specific MDS item for pacemakers, diagnosis codes or nursing assessments should trigger care plan development. The Unit Manager confirmed that nursing, social services, and the MDS Coordinator can add items to care plans, and the facility’s care plan policy—emphasizing resident-focused, safety-oriented care—was in place but not applied to this resident’s pacemaker.
A resident with acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, pulmonary hypertension, and type 2 diabetes was observed receiving oxygen at 4.5 L/min via nasal cannula without a corresponding physician order in the clinical record. The DON acknowledged that an order should have been in place before oxygen was initiated. Facility policy on supplemental oxygen via nasal cannula requires administration only under a physician or provider order, in alignment with 410 IAC 16.2-3.1-47(a)(6).
A resident was discharged to an acute care hospital, but review of MDS listings showed that no discharge MDS assessment was completed for that resident. The MDS Coordinator acknowledged that a discharge assessment is required whenever a resident leaves the facility and could not explain why it was missed. The Executive Director reported there was no specific facility policy for MDS assessments and that staff relied on the RAI manual for guidance.
A resident with a fractured wrist returned from an orthopedic visit wearing a new black wrist splint after the cast was removed, but the clinical record lacked an updated physician order and instructions for splint use and care. Staff also did not document follow-up with the physician, and the care plan was not revised when the splint began being used; the DON acknowledged the missing order and lack of a policy for obtaining updated physician information.
The facility failed to document assessment and monitoring of a resident’s bruising and post-procedure condition, and failed to follow ordered medication hold parameters for two residents. One resident returned from an outpatient spinal injection with no nursing note or assessment, another had persistent bruising with no documentation, and two residents received Metoprolol and midodrine despite pulse or BP values outside ordered limits. A separate resident was observed with purple discolorations and a black scab, but the skin record did not reflect assessment or monitoring.
Failure to Follow Physician Orders for Insulin, Daily Weights, and BP-Related Medications
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves multiple failures to follow physician orders for medication administration and monitoring. For one resident with type 2 diabetes, peripheral vascular disease, and failure to thrive, a physician’s order directed use of Humalog insulin per a specific sliding scale and required physician notification if blood glucose exceeded 400. A blood sugar of 470 was recorded on one date, and the Medication Administration Record (MAR) showed that 5 units of Humalog were given, but there was no documentation in the MAR, assessment tab, or progress notes that the physician was contacted or that new insulin orders were obtained, despite the DON later stating that an additional 5 units had been ordered. Two residents with orders for daily weights did not have those weights consistently obtained or documented as ordered. One resident with heart failure, hypertension, and chronic kidney disease had a physician’s order for daily weights on dayshift, but on multiple dates in February, March, and April, the MAR/TAR and related documentation showed entries marked as “NA,” “X,” or left blank, with no recorded weights, no physician notification, and no explanation for the missing data. Another resident with hypertension, anxiety disorder, and severe protein-calorie malnutrition also had a daily weight order, yet on numerous dates in April and May, weights were marked “NA” without corresponding weights, physician notification, or explanatory documentation; one weight entry was crossed out and the re-weight was not obtained until the following day. LPNs provided differing explanations for “NA” and “X,” indicating inconsistent understanding of documentation practices. Additional deficiencies occurred in the administration of cardiac and blood pressure–related medications contrary to ordered hold parameters. One resident with hypertension had orders for amlodipine, hydralazine, and losartan potassium, each with instructions to hold the medication if systolic blood pressure (SBP) was less than 110, yet the MAR showed these medications were administered on specific dates when the SBP was below the ordered hold threshold. Another resident with hypertension and systolic and diastolic congestive heart failure had been hospitalized for severe hypotension and returned on midodrine with an order to hold the medication if SBP was greater than 110; however, the MAR showed multiple doses were given on various dates when SBP was outside the ordered hold parameter. These actions were inconsistent with the facility’s own policies requiring medications to be administered only as prescribed and weights to be accurately obtained and documented, and they formed the basis of the cited quality of care deficiency.
Informed Consent Not Documented Before Psychotropic Medication Start or Increase
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure informed consent was obtained and documented before starting or increasing psychotropic medications for 2 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. One resident with diagnoses including dementia with psychotic behaviors and anxiety had Rexulti 1 mg initiated for dementia with agitation, with the medication started the next day, but the Psychoactive Medication Consent and Management Agreement dated after the start lacked documentation from the resident's representative giving consent for the new psychotropic medication. Another resident with diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease, major depressive disorder, psychotic disorder, and anxiety had Vraylar increased from 1.5 mg to 3 mg for aggression, with the higher dose started the next day. The Psychoactive Medication Consent and Management Agreement was dated after the increase and documented telephone consent on that later date. The DON stated the consent form should be completed prior to initiation or increase of a new psychotropic medication, and the facility policy required informed consent to be obtained and documented before initiation or an increase in dosage, including discussion of risks, benefits, and alternatives.
Discharge MDS Not Completed Timely
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure the Discharge MDS assessment was completed within the required timeframe for Resident 108. The resident’s record showed diagnoses of alcohol abuse, anxiety, and major depressive disorder. A progress note dated 12/18/25 at 12:50 a.m. documented that the resident was transferred to the emergency room, and another note dated 12/18/25 at 11:38 a.m. stated the resident would be transferred to another LTC facility upon discharge from the hospital. Review of the resident’s MDS assessments showed that no Discharge MDS assessment had been completed. The RAI 3.0 User’s Manual indicated the Discharge MDS must be completed within 14 calendar days after the discharge date and submitted within 14 days after completion. During interview, the MDS coordinator stated the discharge MDS was not completed at discharge and should have been completed within 14 calendar days of the discharge date; she also stated the facility did not have a resident assessment policy and used the RAI tool criteria for completion timeframes.
Inaccurate MDS Assessment Failed to Document Antidepressant Medication
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure an MDS assessment accurately reflected a resident's status for 1 of 32 residents reviewed for MDS accuracy. Resident 23 had diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease and major depressive disorder. Review of the April 2026 MAR showed the resident was prescribed mirtazapine at bedtime on 4/2/26 for insomnia, but the 4/9/26 admission MDS assessment did not document an antidepressant prescription. During interview, the MDS coordinator stated the 4/9/26 MDS assessment was incorrect and should have included the antidepressant medication.
Missing Current Physician Order for Oxygen
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure a current physician's order was in place for a resident receiving oxygen via nasal cannula. Resident 3 was observed in her room on multiple occasions using oxygen from a humidifying oxygen delivery machine via nasal cannula. During interview, the resident stated she had been told after her last hospitalization to use oxygen for another 30 days, but that time had passed and she was still wearing the nasal cannula and receiving oxygen because staff told her she needed it; she also stated the nasal cannula bothered her and she did not want to wear it if it was not necessary. Review of the clinical record showed diagnoses including atrial fibrillation and anxiety, but no current oxygen order. The last oxygen order had a start date of 2/2/26 and a discontinued date of 2/23/26. The DON confirmed there was no current physician's order for oxygen for the resident.
Failure to Include Cardiac Pacemaker in Comprehensive Care Plan
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors identified a deficiency in the facility’s failure to develop and implement a comprehensive care plan addressing a resident’s cardiac pacemaker. The resident was admitted with diagnoses including presence of a cardiac pacemaker, congestive heart failure, atherosclerotic heart disease, and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, with documentation indicating pacemaker dependence. An admission skin assessment noted no skin issues other than the pacemaker, and an admission evaluation documented that the resident utilized a cardiac pacemaker device. A physician’s note further confirmed the resident’s pacemaker dependence as part of her medical history. Despite this documented history and device use, the resident’s care plans did not include any interventions or problem statements related to the pacemaker. During interviews, the MDS Coordinator acknowledged that the pacemaker was not included in the care plan and stated it should have been, explaining that although there is no specific MDS item for pacemakers, a diagnosis code or nursing assessment documentation should trigger care plan development. The Unit Manager reported that nursing, social services, and the MDS Coordinator all have the ability to add items to a resident’s care plan. The facility’s Plan of Care policy, provided by the DON, stated that the care plan is to be resident-focused, provide optimal personalized care, and prioritize resident safety, but this was not followed for the resident’s pacemaker.
Oxygen Administered Without Required Physician Order
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure physician orders were in place for oxygen administration for one resident receiving respiratory care. During an observation on 5/8/26 at 9:45 a.m., Resident 101 was noted to be receiving oxygen at 4.5 liters per minute via nasal cannula. Review of the resident’s clinical record later that day showed diagnoses including acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, pulmonary hypertension, and type 2 diabetes, but no physician’s order for the use of oxygen could be located at the time of review. In a subsequent interview on 5/12/26 at 8:14 a.m., the Director of Nursing stated that physician orders for oxygen should have been present in the record before oxygen was initiated. The facility’s undated policy titled “Supplemental Oxygen Using Nasal Cannula,” provided on 5/13/26, specified that supplemental oxygen may be administered via nasal cannula only at the order of a physician or provider, consistent with 410 IAC 16.2-3.1-47(a)(6). These observations, interviews, and record reviews demonstrate that oxygen was administered to Resident 101 without the required physician order, contrary to both facility policy and state regulatory requirements.
Failure to Complete Required Discharge MDS Assessment
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to complete a required discharge Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for one resident. Record review showed that Resident 90 was admitted on an unspecified date and discharged on 2/10/26 to an acute care hospital, but the MDS listings contained no completed discharge assessment for this resident. During interview, the MDS Coordinator confirmed that a discharge assessment should be completed whenever a resident is discharged and could provide no reason why this assessment was missed for Resident 90. In a separate interview, the Executive Director stated there was no facility policy regarding MDS assessments and that assessments were completed using the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) manual. These findings were cited under 410 IAC 3.1-31(d).
Missing Physician Order and Care Plan Update for New Wrist Splint
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure follow-up was obtained for physician orders and instructions after a resident returned from an orthopedic follow-up appointment with a new left wrist splint. The resident had a fractured carpal bone from a fall that occurred while in the facility and was severely cognitively impaired on the admission MDS. After the resident’s cast was removed at the orthopedic visit, the resident returned wearing a black splint with tie string and was to wear it at all times except for bathing, but the clinical record did not contain an updated physician order or associated instructions for the splint. The record also lacked documentation that facility staff contacted the physician to obtain the updated order and instructions, and the care plan was not revised when the splint was first used. During interviews, the Unit Manager and DON acknowledged that the care plan had not been updated until later and that the record lacked a physician order showing the cast had been discontinued and the splint ordered. The DON also stated the facility lacked a policy for obtaining updated physician orders, progress notes, and specific instructions for the facility.
Failure to document assessments and follow medication parameters
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide care according to orders and documented parameters for multiple residents. One resident with diagnoses including stroke, dementia, and osteoarthritis had an outpatient medial branch block at a surgery center, but there were no nursing progress notes documenting the procedure, the time the resident left the facility, the time the resident returned, or any assessment of the bandage or the resident’s condition on return. The Director of Nursing stated there was no documentation or assessment when the resident came back from the outpatient procedure. Another resident was observed with a dark purple bruise to the left antecubital area on multiple observations, but the record contained no documentation of that bruising. The resident’s diagnoses included anxiety disorder, major depressive disorder, diabetes, heart failure, high blood pressure, and acute kidney failure. The resident had care plan entries related to bruising and bleeding risk from anticoagulant use and bruising from needle sticks, and weekly skin observations documented no bruises. The DON stated the resident had a blood draw, but there was no documentation regarding the bruise to the left arm. Two residents had medications administered outside ordered parameters. One resident received Metoprolol Tartrate 50 mg twice daily for high blood pressure with instructions to hold if pulse was less than 60, but the MAR showed doses given when the pulse was below 60 on several occasions. Another resident on hospice care received midodrine 5 mg three times daily with instructions to hold if systolic blood pressure was greater than 110, but the MAR showed the medication was administered multiple times when systolic blood pressure exceeded that limit. In addition, a resident was observed with purple discolorations and a black scab on the left forearm, wrist, and hand, but the weekly skin assessment documented no bruising and there was no documentation that the discolorations were assessed or monitored.
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.
