Ruleville Community Care Center
Inspection history, citations, penalties and survey trends for this long-term care facility in Ruleville, Mississippi.
- Location
- 800 Stansel Dr, Ruleville, Mississippi 38771
- CMS Provider Number
- 255113
- Inspections on file
- 25
- Latest survey
- August 28, 2025
- Citations (last 12 mo.)
- 13
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Ruleville Community Care Center during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident reported pain caused by a CNA during repositioning and filed a grievance, but there was no follow-up or documentation showing the grievance was resolved or discussed with the resident. The grievance was marked as resolved in the log without the resident's signature or confirmation.
The facility did not report multiple allegations of abuse involving three cognitively intact residents to the State Survey Agency as required by policy. Incidents included verbal mistreatment, rough handling, and inappropriate language by CNAs. Although internal actions were taken, the required external reporting was not completed.
Two residents reported being hurt or mistreated by CNAs, but despite these allegations being brought to the attention of the DON and administrator, no formal investigation was conducted as required by facility policy. The CNAs involved were removed from the residents' care, but neither resident was interviewed about the incidents, and the DON considered the complaints to be customer service issues rather than potential abuse.
A resident with Dementia and Impulse Disorder was improperly restrained with a sheet tied to a wheelchair without physician orders, consent, or assessment. The facility's policy requires restraints only as a last resort, but the resident was found with a sheet tied around her waist. The Director of Nursing confirmed the incident but could not identify who applied the restraint. Additionally, the resident was using a mattress with elevated sides and foam wedges without proper documentation or orders.
A resident with Dementia and Impulse Disorder was found restrained with a sheet tied to a wheelchair, which was not reported to the State Agency. The DON believed it was for safety due to the resident's behaviors and falls, but the Administrator later acknowledged it as inappropriate treatment.
A resident in an LTC facility died after another resident, who was severely obese and had a history of delusional behavior, lay on top of him. The facility failed to identify roommate incompatibility or provide appropriate behavioral interventions, despite previous incidents of the obese resident being found in bed with other residents. This neglect placed residents at risk, resulting in a tragic death.
A resident with a history of delusional and aggressive behavior was not adequately monitored due to the facility's failure to update their care plan. This oversight led to a tragic incident where the resident was found in bed with another resident, who was later pronounced dead. Staff interviews confirmed that the care plan lacked necessary revisions and interventions to prevent such occurrences.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment and behavioral issues was inadequately supervised, leading to a fatal incident where he was found unclothed on top of another resident, resulting in the latter's death. Despite previous incidents of inappropriate behavior, the facility failed to update the resident's care plan or increase monitoring, placing all residents at risk.
A resident with mental disorders exhibited aggressive and inappropriate behaviors, which were not adequately monitored or addressed by the facility. Despite previous incidents of the resident being found in bed with others, the facility failed to implement necessary interventions or update care plans. This inaction led to a tragic incident where the resident was found unclothed on top of another resident, resulting in the latter's death. The State Agency identified Immediate Jeopardy and Substandard Quality of Care due to these deficiencies.
Failure to Resolve and Document Resident Grievance
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to resolve a grievance submitted by a resident who reported that a CNA caused pain by jerking his legs during repositioning, which hurt his back. The resident stated he reported the incident to staff, but no one followed up with him regarding the complaint. The DON confirmed that a grievance form was completed on behalf of the resident, but the form was not signed by the resident, and there was no documentation indicating that the grievance had been resolved or discussed with the resident. The grievance log listed the complaint as resolved, but there was no evidence of communication with the resident or proper closure of the grievance. Social Services staff confirmed that grievances should be discussed with and signed by residents before being considered resolved.
Failure to Report Alleged Abuse to State Survey Agency
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that all alleged abuse violations were reported to the State Survey Agency as required by its own policy. The policy mandates immediate reporting of alleged abuse, neglect, or theft to the administrator and appropriate authorities, including the State Survey Agency, within specified timeframes. However, for three of five reviewed cases involving alleged abuse, the facility did not report the incidents as required. In one instance, a resident with a history of major depressive disorder, anxiety, pain, and cerebral palsy reported that a CNA told her to "shut up" when she complained of leg pain during repositioning. The resident reported the incident to the former administrator, who initiated an internal investigation but did not report the allegation to the State Survey Agency, believing it did not constitute abuse. In another case, a cognitively intact resident with paraplegia reported that two CNAs hurt him during care, including being jerked and slapped with a wet towel. The resident stated that no one followed up with him about his complaint, although the CNAs were removed from his care. A third resident, also cognitively intact and with diagnoses including anxiety, pain, and hemiplegia, reported to the DON that a CNA hurt him during care and spoke to him inappropriately. The DON acknowledged receiving the complaint but considered it a customer service issue and did not report it to the state. In all three cases, the facility failed to follow its policy for reporting alleged abuse to the State Survey Agency, as confirmed by interviews with staff and review of facility records.
Failure to Investigate Alleged Abuse Reports
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to investigate allegations of abuse for two of five residents reviewed, as required by its own policy. One resident reported to staff that two CNAs had hurt him while turning him, and also reported to the administrator that another CNA had slapped his face with a wet towel during a bed bath. The resident stated that after making these reports, the CNAs involved no longer worked with him, but no one from the facility had followed up or interviewed him about the incidents. Another resident reported that a CNA attempted to turn him alone, causing pain, and sometimes spoke to him in an unkind manner. He reported this to the DON, after which the CNA was removed from his care, but again, no investigation or follow-up interview was conducted. Interviews with the DON confirmed awareness of the complaints and that the CNAs were removed from providing care to the residents involved, but no formal investigation was initiated because the DON considered the issues to be customer service concerns rather than abuse. The DON also admitted that an investigation should have been conducted, especially after one resident was sent to the emergency room for back pain following his complaint. The facility's policy requires immediate investigation of any potential abuse or neglect, but this was not followed in these cases. Both residents involved had significant medical histories, including paraplegia and hemiplegia, and were cognitively intact at the time of the incidents.
Improper Use of Physical Restraints Without Physician Orders
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to prevent a resident from being physically restrained with a sheet tied to a wheelchair, without obtaining physician orders, consent, or conducting an assessment for the need of restraints. The incident involved a resident who was observed with a sheet tied around her waist and knotted behind the wheelchair. Several Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs) reported seeing the resident restrained in this manner, and one CNA reported the situation to a Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), who allegedly stated it was for the resident's safety. However, the LPN later denied any knowledge of the restraint or instructing staff to use it. The facility's policy, in accordance with the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (OBRA) requirements, states that all residents have the right to be unrestrained, and restraints should only be used as a last resort with proper evaluation and physician orders. Despite this, the facility did not have any physician's orders, consents, or assessments for the use of a mattress with elevated sides and foam wedges that were also in place for the resident. The Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed that an investigation was conducted, but they were unable to determine who applied the restraint. The DON believed the restraint was used for the resident's safety due to recent combative behavior and sliding in the wheelchair. The resident involved had been admitted to the facility with diagnoses including Dementia and Impulse Disorder. The facility's Daily Care Guide for the resident did not list any interventions for the use of foam wedges, and there were no physician's orders for the mattress with elevated sides or wedges. The Unit Manager emphasized that restraints should never be applied without assessment, physician orders, and family consent, as they pose a risk of injury, such as sliding and choking.
Failure to Report Resident Restraint Incident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to report an allegation of mistreatment involving a resident who was physically restrained with a sheet tied to a wheelchair. The incident involved a resident with diagnoses of Dementia and Impulse Disorder, who was dependent on a wheelchair for locomotion. On 6/9/24, four CNAs observed the resident restrained with a sheet tied around the wheelchair. One CNA reported seeing the resident restrained twice on the same day, with a co-worker indicating that a nurse had instructed not to remove the sheet for the resident's safety. The Director of Nursing (DON) was informed of the incident on 6/10/24 and conducted an investigation. Despite the findings, the facility did not report the incident to the State Agency, as the DON believed it was done for the resident's safety due to her behaviors and falls. The facility was unable to determine who restrained the resident. The Administrator later agreed that using a sheet to restrain the resident was inappropriate and should have been reported as mistreatment.
Neglect and Inadequate Behavioral Interventions Lead to Resident Death
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to protect a resident from neglect, resulting in a tragic incident where one resident died after another resident, who was severely obese and had a history of delusional behavior, lay on top of him. The facility did not identify roommate incompatibility or provide appropriate person-centered behavioral interventions, which placed the deceased resident and others at risk. The incident occurred after the staff responded to a call light and found the obese resident unclothed and lying on top of the deceased resident, who was unresponsive and later pronounced dead. Prior to the incident, there were multiple occasions where the obese resident was found in bed with other residents, including a deaf and mute resident, but these incidents were not thoroughly investigated or addressed by the facility. Staff interviews revealed that the obese resident had a history of delusional episodes and had been observed inappropriately in bed with roommates on previous occasions. Despite these warning signs, the facility did not implement increased monitoring or update the resident's care plan to prevent further incidents. The facility's neglect to address the behavioral issues and roommate incompatibility of the obese resident led to a situation where other residents were at risk of harm. The staff failed to recognize the potential for abuse and did not take necessary actions to protect vulnerable residents, resulting in the death of one resident and placing others in jeopardy.
Removal Plan
- Resident #1 was placed on one-on-one supervision immediately. Psychiatric placement was initiated but was unsuccessful. A telehealth visit was conducted with the psychiatric nurse practitioner. Resident #1 remained on one-on-one supervision until he was discharged to the custody of the local police department.
- The Administrator presented to the facility and initiated an investigation with assigned licensed nurses and certified nursing assistants.
- The Administrator notified the MS State Department of Health, Attorney General Office, and Ombudsman.
- An in-service was initiated for all staff regarding supervision of accidents and incidents, abuse/neglect, how to handle resident to resident altercations, reporting of any resident with delusional behaviors or verbalizing harmful behaviors to others, how to deal with aggressive behaviors.
- A special resident council meeting was conducted by the Administrator and Director of Nurses to ensure that the facility's residents felt safe. 21 out of 21 Residents verbalized feeling safe in the facility.
- The social service department completed a 100% audit on roommate compatibility. 100% of the roommates were compatible or chose to be roommates.
- An in-service was initiated by the President of Operations for all staff on prevention/supervision of accidents, abuse/neglect, abuse reporting, resident rights, implementing interventions to prevent reoccurrence and updating care plans to reflect interventions and monitoring of behaviors. In-service details: When residents are observed in another resident's bed to immediately intervene and separate. The staff was instructed to notify the nurse immediately and protect the alleged victim by remaining one-on-one supervision with the alleged aggressor. The nurses were instructed to immediately perform head to toe skin assessments for both Residents while ensuring and notifying the Executive Director and Director of Nurses. The Administrator and Director of Nurses were instructed to ensure that a thorough investigation is completed and reported to the state agencies. The Administrator and Director of Nurses was instructed to ensure that interventions are put in place to protect other Residents and the alleged aggressor's care plan is updated and behavior is monitoring is in place. In-service also included notifying the nurse, Administrator, and Director of nurses immediately if any Resident verbalize or exhibits delusional behaviors that are harmful towards others. No staff will be allowed to work until the in-service is received.
- The President of Operations in serviced the Administrator and Director of Nurses on abuse/neglect and ensuring to investigate and report all instances of abuse/neglect to regulatory agencies.
- The President of Operations in serviced the social service department on ensuring that care plans are revised to reflect interventions and behaviors are monitored.
- An interview was initiated for 28 cognitive residents to determine if they have incurred any issues with other residents lying in their beds. 28 of 28 Residents denied any concerns.
- A 100% audit was initiated by the social services department to ensure that all Residents had compatible roommates. No issues identified.
- A 100% audit was conducted by the social services department to ensure that Residents' behaviors are care planned and monitoring is in place.
- The Administrator reported the incident involving Resident #1 and Resident #3 to the Mississippi State Department of Health.
- An emergency quality assurance committee met. The attendees of the meeting were the Administrator, Director of Nurses, Assistant Director of Nurses, Social Services Assistant, Staff Development Coordinator, Nurse Practitioner, Regional Clinical Operations Nurse, and Regional President. The facility discussed the current survey IJ outcomes. 5 IJ were cited for abuse/neglect, abuse reporting, revision of care plans, behavioral monitoring, and accidents/incidents. Upon investigation, Resident #1 had previous behavioral issues with Resident #3. Resident #1 was unclothed. The facility failed to report, investigate and implement interventions based on the behaviors. In-services modified to include protecting residents from others who get into their beds by intervening and providing one-on-one supervision. In addition, reporting and investigating alleged events. All policies were reviewed for accidents/incidents, abuse prevention, revision of care plans, behavioral monitoring. No changes required.
- The Ombudsman was notified of the incident.
- The Administrator reported the incident involving Resident #1 and Resident #3 to the Attorney General Office online system.
Failure to Revise Care Plan for Resident with Behavioral Issues
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to revise a comprehensive care plan for a resident known to exhibit behaviors of getting into bed with other residents. This failure resulted in staff not having access to preventative measures to deter such behavior. On one occasion, the resident was found in bed on top of another resident, who was unresponsive and later pronounced dead. This incident placed all residents at risk and was likely to cause serious injury, harm, impairment, or death. The care plan for the resident in question did not include revisions to address the behavior of getting into other residents' beds, despite previous incidents being documented. Staff interviews revealed that the care plan was not updated to reflect these behaviors, and no increased monitoring or interventions were put in place. The resident had a history of delusional, aggressive, and socially inappropriate behavior, and was severely cognitively impaired, which further necessitated the need for a revised care plan. Interviews with facility staff, including the Social Service worker and the Director of Nurses, confirmed that the care plan should have been updated to include one-on-one observation and increased monitoring. The failure to update the care plan and implement necessary interventions left other residents vulnerable to harm, as the resident was ambulatory and could have entered any resident's bed, posing a risk of accidental harm or abuse.
Removal Plan
- Resident #1 was placed on one-on-one supervision immediately. Psychiatric placement was initiated but was unsuccessful. A telehealth visit was conducted with the psychiatric nurse practitioner. Resident #1 remained on one-on-one supervision until he was discharged to the custody of the local police department.
- The Administrator presented to the facility and initiated an investigation with assigned licensed nurses and certified nursing assistants.
- The Administrator notified the MS State Department of Health, Attorney General Office, and Ombudsman.
- An in-service was initiated for all staff regarding supervision of accidents and incidents, abuse/neglect, how to handle resident to resident altercations, reporting of any resident with delusional behaviors or verbalizing harmful behaviors to others, how to deal with aggressive behaviors.
- A special resident council meeting was conducted by the Administrator and Director of Nurses to ensure that the facility's residents felt safe. 21 out of 21 Residents verbalized feeling safe in the facility.
- The social service department completed a 100% audit on roommate compatibility. 100% of the roommates were compatible or chose to be roommates.
- An in-service was initiated by the President of Operations for all staff on prevention/supervision of accidents, abuse/neglect, abuse reporting, resident rights, implementing interventions to prevent reoccurrence and updating care plans to reflect interventions and monitoring of behaviors. In-service details: When residents are observed in another resident's bed to immediately intervene and separate. The staff was instructed to notify the nurse immediately and protect the alleged victim by remaining one-on-one supervision with the alleged aggressor. The nurses were instructed to immediately perform head to toe skin assessments for both Residents while ensuring and notifying the Executive Director and Director of Nurses. The Administrator and Director of Nurses were instructed to ensure that a thorough investigation is completed and reported to the state agencies. The Administrator and Director of Nurses were instructed to ensure that interventions are put in place to protect other Residents and the alleged aggressor's care plan is updated and behavior is monitoring is in place. In-service also included notifying the nurse, Administrator, and Director of nurses immediately if any Resident verbalize or exhibits delusional behaviors that are harmful towards others. No staff will be allowed to work until the in-service is received.
- The President of Operations in serviced the Administrator and Director of Nurses on abuse/neglect and ensuring to investigate and report all instances of abuse/neglect to regulatory agencies.
- The President of Operations in serviced the social service department on ensuring that care plans are revised to reflect interventions and behaviors are monitored.
- An interview was initiated for 28 cognitive residents to determine if they have incurred any issues with other residents lying in their beds. 28 of 28 Residents denied any concerns.
- A 100% audit was initiated by the social services department to ensure that all Residents had compatible roommates. No issues identified.
- A 100% audit was conducted by the social services department to ensure that Residents' behaviors are care planned and monitoring is in place.
- The Administrator reported the incident involving Resident #1 and Resident #3 to the MS State Department of Health.
- An emergency quality assurance committee met. The attendees of the meeting were the Administrator, Director of Nurses, Assistant Director of Nurses, Social Services Assistant, Staff Development Coordinator, Nurse Practitioner, Regional Clinical Operations Nurse, and Regional President. The facility discussed the current survey IJ outcomes. 5 IJ cites for abuse/neglect, abuse reporting, revision of care plans, behavioral monitoring, and accidents/incidents. Upon investigation, Resident #1 had previous behavioral issues with Resident #3. Resident #1 was unclothed. The facility failed to report, investigate and implement interventions based on the behaviors. In-services modified to include protecting residents from others who get into their beds by intervening and providing one-on-one supervision. In addition, reporting and investigating alleged events. All policies were reviewed for accidents/incidents, abuse prevention, revision of care plans, behavioral monitoring. No changes required.
- The Ombudsman was notified of the incident.
- The Administrator reported the incident involving Resident #1 and Resident #3 to the Attorney General Office online system.
Inadequate Supervision Leads to Resident Death
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide adequate supervision and monitoring for residents with behavioral needs, leading to a tragic incident involving two residents. Resident #1, who was severely cognitively impaired and had a history of behavioral issues, was found unclothed and lying on top of Resident #2, resulting in Resident #2's death. Prior to this incident, Resident #1 had been observed in bed with another resident, Resident #3, but no increased monitoring or interventions were implemented despite the potential risk. The facility's records indicate that Resident #1 had been admitted with diagnoses including unspecified mood affective disorder, unspecified psychosis, and anxiety disorder. Despite these conditions and previous incidents of inappropriate behavior, such as getting into bed with other residents, the facility did not update Resident #1's care plan or increase supervision. Staff interviews revealed that the potential for harm was not recognized, and no actions were taken to prevent further incidents. The lack of appropriate interventions and monitoring placed all residents at risk, particularly those who were vulnerable, such as Resident #3, who was deaf and mute. The facility's failure to act on previous incidents and the absence of a proactive approach to managing Resident #1's behaviors directly contributed to the fatal incident involving Resident #2.
Removal Plan
- Resident #1 was placed on one-on-one supervision immediately. Psychiatric placement was initiated but was unsuccessful. A telehealth visit was conducted with the psychiatric nurse practitioner. Resident #1 remained on one-on-one supervision until he was discharged to the custody of the local police department.
- The Administrator presented to the facility and initiated an investigation with assigned licensed nurses and certified nursing assistants.
- The Administrator notified the MS State Department of Health, Attorney General Office, and Ombudsman.
- An in-service was initiated for all staff regarding supervision of accidents and incidents, abuse/neglect, how to handle resident to resident altercations, reporting of any resident with delusional behaviors or verbalizing harmful behaviors to others, how to deal with aggressive behaviors.
- A special resident council meeting was conducted by the Administrator and Director of Nurses to ensure that the facility's residents felt safe. 21 out of 21 Residents verbalized feeling safe in the facility.
- The social service department completed a 100% audit on roommate compatibility. 100% of the roommates were compatible or chose to be roommates.
- An in-service was initiated by the President of Operations for all staff on prevention/supervision of accidents, abuse/neglect, abuse reporting, resident rights, implementing interventions to prevent reoccurrence and updating care plans to reflect interventions and monitoring of behaviors. In-service details: When residents are observed in another resident's bed to immediately intervene and separate. The staff was instructed to notify the nurse immediately and protect the alleged victim by remaining one-on-one supervision with the alleged aggressor. The nurses were instructed to immediately perform head to toe skin assessments for both Residents while ensuring and notifying the Executive Director and Director of Nurses. The Administrator and Director of Nurses were instructed to ensure that a thorough investigation is completed and reported to the state agencies. The Administrator and Director of Nurses was instructed to ensure that interventions are put in place to protect other Residents and the alleged aggressor's care plan is updated and behavior is monitoring is in place. In-service also included notifying the nurse, Administrator, and Director of nurses immediately if any Resident verbalize or exhibits delusional behaviors that are harmful towards others. No staff will be allowed to work until the in-service is received.
- The President of Operations in serviced the Administrator and Director of Nurses on abuse/neglect and ensuring to investigate and report all instances of abuse/neglect to regulatory agencies.
- The President of Operations in serviced the social service department on ensuring that care plans are revised to reflect interventions and behaviors are monitored.
- An interview was initiated for 28 cognitive residents to determine if they have incurred any issues with other residents lying in their beds. 28 of 28 Residents denied any concerns.
- A 100% audit was initiated by the social services department to ensure that all Residents had compatible roommates. No issues identified.
- A 100% audit was conducted by the social services department to ensure that Residents' behaviors are care planned and monitoring is in place.
- The Administrator reported the incident involving Resident #1 and Resident #3 to the MS State Department of Health.
- An emergency quality assurance committee met. The attendees of the meeting were the Administrator, Director of Nurses, Assistant Director of Nurses, Social Services Assistant, Staff Development Coordinator, Nurse Practitioner, Regional Clinical Operations Nurse, and Regional President. The facility discussed the current survey IJ outcomes. 5 IJ cites for abuse/neglect, abuse reporting, revision of care plans, behavioral monitoring, and accidents/incidents. Upon investigation, Resident #1 had previous behavioral issues with Resident #3. Resident #1 was unclothed. The facility failed to report, investigate and implement interventions based on the behaviors. In-services modified to include protecting residents from others who get into their beds by intervening and providing one-on-one supervision. In addition, reporting and investigating alleged events. All policies were reviewed for accidents/incidents, abuse prevention, revision of care plans, behavioral monitoring. No changes required.
- The Ombudsman was notified of the incident by the Administrator.
- The Administrator reported the incident involving Resident #1 and Resident #3 to the Attorney General Office online system.
Failure to Address Resident Behaviors Leads to Fatal Incident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to recognize and appropriately address the behaviors of a resident diagnosed with mental disorders, leading to a tragic incident. The resident, who was admitted with diagnoses including Unspecified Mood Affective Disorder, Unspecified Psychosis, and Anxiety Disorder, exhibited behaviors such as physical aggression, verbal aggression, delusions, and inappropriate social interactions. Despite these documented behaviors, the facility did not implement adequate monitoring or interventions, resulting in the resident being found unclothed and lying on top of another resident, who subsequently died. Prior to the incident, there were multiple occasions where the resident was found inappropriately in bed with other residents, yet the facility did not increase monitoring or update the care plan to address these behaviors. Staff interviews revealed that the resident was not placed on special monitoring before the incident, and there was a lack of documentation and follow-up on the resident's behavior. The facility's failure to act on these warning signs and implement person-centered behavioral interventions contributed to the incident. The State Agency identified Immediate Jeopardy and Substandard Quality of Care due to the facility's inaction, which placed other residents at risk. The facility's policies on behavior management and monitoring were not effectively followed, leading to a failure in providing a safe environment for all residents. The lack of appropriate supervision and intervention for the resident's behaviors ultimately resulted in the death of another resident, highlighting significant deficiencies in the facility's care practices.
Removal Plan
- Resident #1 was placed on one-on-one supervision immediately. Psychiatric placement was initiated but was unsuccessful. A telehealth visit was conducted with the psychiatric nurse practitioner. Resident #1 remained on one-on-one supervision until he was discharged to the custody of the local police department.
- The Administrator presented to the facility and initiated an investigation with assigned licensed nurses and certified nursing assistants.
- The Administrator notified the MS State Department of Health, Attorney General Office, and Ombudsman.
- An in-service was initiated for all staff regarding supervision of accidents and incidents, abuse/neglect, how to handle resident to resident altercations, reporting of any resident with delusional behaviors or verbalizing harmful behaviors to others, how to deal with aggressive behaviors.
- A special resident council meeting was conducted by the Administrator and Director of Nurses to ensure that the facility's residents felt safe. 21 out of 21 Residents verbalized feeling safe in the facility.
- The social service department completed a 100% audit on roommate compatibility. 100% of the roommates were compatible or chose to be roommates.
- An in-service was initiated by the President of Operations for all staff on prevention/supervision of accidents, abuse/neglect, abuse reporting, resident rights, implementing interventions to prevent reoccurrence and updating care plans to reflect interventions and monitoring of behaviors. In-service details: When residents are observed in another resident's bed to immediately intervene and separate. The staff was instructed to notify the nurse immediately and protect the alleged victim by remaining 1-on-1 supervision with the alleged aggressor. The nurses were instructed to immediately perform head to toe skin assessments for both Residents while ensuring and notifying the Executive Director and Director of Nurses. The Administrator and Director of Nurses were instructed to ensure that a thorough investigation is completed and reported to the state agencies. The Administrator and Director of Nurses was instructed to ensure that interventions are put in place to protect other Residents and the alleged aggressor's care plan is updated and behavior is monitoring is in place. In-service also included notifying the nurse, Administrator, and Director of nurses immediately if any Resident verbalize or exhibits delusional behaviors that are harmful towards others. No staff will be allowed to work until the in-service is received.
- The President of Operations in serviced the Administrator and Director of Nurses on abuse/neglect and ensuring to investigate and report all instances of abuse/neglect to regulatory agencies.
- The President of Operations in serviced the social service department on ensuring that care plans are revised to reflect interventions and behaviors are monitored.
- An interview was initiated for 28 cognitive residents to determine if they have incurred any issues with other residents lying in their beds. 28 of 28 Residents denied any concerns.
- A 100% audit was initiated by the social services department to ensure that all Residents had compatible roommates. No issues identified.
- A 100% audit was conducted by the social services department to ensure that Residents' behaviors are care planned and monitoring is in place.
- The Administrator reported the incident involving Resident #1 and Resident #3 to the MS State Department of Health.
- An emergency quality assurance committee met. The attendees of the meeting were the Administrator, Director of Nurses, Assistant Director of Nurses, Social Services Assistant, Staff Development Coordinator, Nurse Practitioner, Regional Clinical Operations Nurse, and Regional President. The facility discussed the current survey IJ outcomes. 5 IJ cites for abuse/neglect, abuse reporting, revision of care plans, behavioral monitoring, and accidents/incidents. Upon investigation, Resident #1 had previous behavioral issues with Resident #3. Resident #1 was unclothed. The facility failed to report, investigate and implement interventions based on the behaviors. In-services modified to include protecting residents from others who get into their beds by intervening and providing 1-on-1 supervision. In addition, reporting and investigating alleged events. All policies were reviewed for accidents/incidents, abuse prevention, revision of care plans, behavioral monitoring. No changes required.
- The Ombudsman was notified of the incident.
- The Administrator reported the incident involving Resident #1 and Resident #3 to the Attorney General Office online system.
Latest citations in Mississippi
A resident with advanced dementia and severe cognitive impairment sustained a bruised left eye and facial bruising after being struck by a CNA. The CNA initially claimed the injury occurred accidentally while pushing the resident to a dining table and denied hitting the resident, but an LPN and another CNA reported that the resident stated she had hit the CNA and was hit back in the eye, demonstrating a slapping motion. Nursing documentation described left orbital ecchymosis, bruising along the bridge of the nose and cheek, tenderness, minimal edema, and the resident’s complaint of soreness, confirming a significant injury resulting from the physical abuse.
The facility failed to protect residents’ right to a dignified and comfortable environment when it did not effectively manage one cognitively impaired resident’s ongoing nighttime yelling, which repeatedly disrupted the sleep of two cognitively intact residents. Staff, including a CNA, the DON, and the Administrator, were aware that this resident, diagnosed with dementia and psychosis, frequently yelled and screamed at night while often sleeping during the day. Progress notes documented nighttime hollering, and interviews confirmed that the disruptive behavior persisted over time, interfering with other residents’ ability to rest.
Surveyors found that the facility failed to protect two residents’ rights to dignity and privacy during routine care. One resident, with moderate cognitive impairment and dependent for toilet hygiene, was observed receiving incontinence care while uncovered, with the room door open and the privacy curtain only partially drawn, allowing visibility into the hallway despite facility policy requiring full privacy. Another resident, dependent for eating and with hemiplegia after a stroke, was assisted with lunch by a CNA who stood over the resident instead of sitting at eye level as required by the facility’s feeding skills checklist. Staff interviews, including with CNAs, an LPN, the DON, and the Administrator, confirmed that existing policies and in-service training directed staff to provide privacy during incontinence care and to sit beside residents when assisting with meals to ensure dignified care.
A resident with epilepsy, skin infection, an upper arm wound, gastrostomy status, and moderate cognitive impairment was observed twice resting in bed with a lunch tray while the call light was not within reach—once on the floor under the bed and once hanging behind the mattress, out of sight. The resident reported being able to use the call light but not knowing where it was. Staff, including CNAs, an LPN, the DON, and the Administrator, stated that call lights are expected to be left within residents’ reach and that training and competencies address this requirement, but there was no specific written policy on call light placement.
A resident with moderate cognitive impairment, dependent for toilet hygiene and with multiple medical conditions, was observed receiving incontinent care in which a CNA removed a urine-soaked brief, changed the bed sheet, and applied a clean brief without performing any required perineal cleansing of the front or back. Facility policy and the peri-care skills checklist specified that male residents must have the perineal area, including the penis, scrotum, and inner thighs, washed, rinsed, and dried during incontinent care. The CNA later acknowledged having been trained and competency-checked on this procedure and knowing cleansing was required. Other staff, including a CNA supervisor, an LPN, the DON, and the Administrator, confirmed that proper incontinent care includes full perineal cleansing in addition to brief changes, establishing that the observed omission did not follow facility policy or professional standards intended to prevent UTIs.
Surveyors found that staff failed to follow infection control practices during PEG tube and wound care. Two residents with PEG tubes had sites with visible brown, crusted or yellowish drainage that had not been cleaned for several days, despite physician orders for daily cleansing and, when indicated, dressings. In another case, a CNA provided peri-care for stool and then assisted with a stage IV sacral pressure ulcer dressing change without changing gloves or performing hand hygiene, contrary to facility policy and staff expectations for aseptic technique.
Surveyors found that the facility failed to maintain a safe, clean, and homelike environment when a resident’s room contained odorous soiled linens left on the floor and later placed on furniture with clean clothing, and the bed was made with torn linens exposing the mattress. Other residents reported that housekeeping did not clean under beds, and multiple large dead roaches were repeatedly observed under several beds, with one resident stating he often disposed of dead roaches himself. Residents also reported refusing to use the north shower room due to dirty clothing, feces, and residue on shower chairs and floors; an observation confirmed the presence of soiled clothing, a soiled brief, and unidentified substances on the shower chair and floor, despite staff acknowledging that CNAs were expected to clean and sanitize the shower room after each use.
The facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program, as evidenced by repeated observations of roaches and other insects in multiple resident rooms and common areas. Surveyors found gnats and dead roaches under beds, while several residents reported seeing roaches on ceilings, walls, and floors, including roaches falling onto them at night and having to remove dead roaches themselves. A family member reported bringing her own roach spray due to concerns about roaches in a loved one’s room. During a Resident Council meeting, roaches were seen crawling across the floor, and residents stated that roaches were commonly observed throughout the building. Although the contracted pest control provider reported monthly service focused mainly on entry points and exterior areas and facility staff described processes for reporting pests, the persistent roach activity showed the program was not effectively preventing or controlling pests.
A resident with multiple chronic conditions, who relied on phone contact with a seriously ill significant other, lost access to private communication after her personal cell phone was broken and sent out for repair. Facility policy guarantees residents access to a telephone and private communication, but there was no cordless phone available on the relevant hall, and staff, including the DON, SSD, and Administrator, confirmed there was no convenient method for residents on that hall to make private calls without arranging to use a staff office. This resulted in the resident having no readily available, private telephone option.
A resident with heart failure, chronic kidney disease, hypertension, moderate cognitive impairment, and total dependence on staff for personal and toilet hygiene reported difficulty obtaining assistance with ADLs. Observation revealed the resident had ten long, dirty fingernails extending several millimeters beyond the fingertips with black material underneath, and the resident stated they needed cleaning and cutting. An LPN confirmed the nails were too long and dirty, acknowledged that nursing staff were responsible for daily and weekly fingernail checks and for providing fingernail care as part of ADLs, and noted that such nails could cause skin damage or scratches. The DON and Administrator both confirmed that personal hygiene and grooming are part of ADLs and are expected to be provided for all residents dependent on staff.
Failure to Protect Cognitively Impaired Resident From Physical Abuse by CNA
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to protect a resident from abuse, resulting in the resident being struck in the eye by a CNA. Facility records show that a CNA reported to an LPN that the resident had a bruised left eye and initially stated the injury may have occurred while pushing the resident to the dining table due to the resident’s short, stooped posture. The CNA also reported that the resident used a racial slur toward her and that she verbally responded but denied striking the resident. However, subsequent interviews and the facility’s investigation determined that the resident’s injury was not caused by accidental contact with the dining table. Interviews with staff revealed conflicting accounts that led to the conclusion that the resident had been hit. An LPN stated that the resident reported being hit in the eye by the CNA and that another CNA heard a commotion and later observed bruising to the resident’s left eye. When this second CNA asked what happened, the resident reported that she hit the CNA and was hit back in the eye, while making a motion consistent with a slap. The LPN confirmed that the resident gave a similar account to her, indicating that the CNA had physically struck the resident. The resident involved was admitted to the Memory Care Unit with diagnoses including Alzheimer’s disease, cognitive communication deficit, and unspecified dementia with behavioral disturbance, and had a BIMS score of 5 indicating severe cognitive impairment. A nursing progress note documented an acute follow-up assessment of left orbital ecchymosis, describing a dark red circular bruise to the left eye region, dark purple bruising along the lateral bridge of the nose extending to the superior left cheek, tenderness on palpation, minimal edema, and the resident’s complaint that the area was sore. Due to advanced Alzheimer’s disease, the resident was unable to reliably express additional symptoms, but the documented physical findings supported that the resident sustained a significant injury to the eye area as a result of being struck by the CNA.
Failure to Protect Residents’ Right to Rest Due to Unmanaged Nighttime Yelling
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to ensure a dignified and comfortable environment by not effectively addressing ongoing disruptive nighttime behaviors of one resident that interfered with other residents’ ability to rest. Resident #1, admitted with diagnoses including Psychosis and Dementia and a BIMS score of 4 indicating severely impaired cognition, had documented episodes of hollering and yelling during nighttime hours, as noted in progress notes on 3/12/26 and 3/13/26. Interviews with cognitively intact residents, Resident #2 and Resident #3 (both with BIMS scores of 15), revealed that they frequently experienced disrupted sleep due to Resident #1 yelling loudly at night, while the environment was generally quiet during the day. Staff interviews confirmed awareness of the pattern of behavior. CNA #1, who worked both day and night shifts, reported that Resident #1 frequently yelled and screamed at intervals throughout the night and was generally quiet and often slept during the day, with staff assisting the resident out of bed into a geri-chair during both day and nighttime hours. The DON acknowledged the facility was aware of Resident #1’s increased nighttime yelling and extended daytime rest, attributing it to the resident’s Dementia and Psychosis, and stated that interventions such as monitoring, repositioning, offering care, and attempts at redirection had not stopped the behaviors. The Administrator also confirmed awareness of concerns that nighttime noise from Resident #1 affected other residents’ ability to rest. Despite this awareness and ongoing complaints from other residents, the disruptive nighttime yelling continued, resulting in a failure to uphold residents’ rights to a dignified existence and a comfortable environment.
Failure to Ensure Privacy and Dignified Care During Incontinence Care and Feeding
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to ensure residents were treated with dignity and provided privacy during care, as required by resident rights policies and skills checklists. The facility’s Nursing Facility Resident Rights policy guaranteed residents the right to be treated with dignity, courtesy, and respect, and to have privacy during personal care. Facility skills checklists for feeding and peri/incontinent care specified that staff should sit facing residents at eye level when feeding and provide privacy by drawing curtains and closing doors during incontinence care. For Resident #2, surveyors observed a CNA providing incontinent care without closing the resident’s room door and with the privacy curtain only partially drawn. From the surveyor’s position at the bottom right corner of the bed, it was possible to see into the hallway while the resident was uncovered and exposed. Resident #2’s records showed admission with diagnoses including epilepsy, infection of the skin and subcutaneous tissue, an open wound of the left upper arm, and gastrostomy status. A recent MDS assessment documented a BIMS score of 11, indicating moderate cognitive impairment, and that the resident was dependent for toilet hygiene. The CNA later confirmed awareness that incontinence care required provision of privacy and that she had been trained and competency-checked on this requirement. For Resident #3, surveyors observed a CNA assisting the resident with eating while standing over the resident rather than sitting beside her, contrary to the facility’s feeding skills checklist and training. The DON intervened during the observation and instructed the CNA that staff were to sit next to residents while assisting with eating. The CNA stated she had forgotten to sit beside the resident. Resident #3’s records showed recent admission with diagnoses of cerebral infarction (stroke), anemia, and hemiplegia and hemiparesis affecting the right dominant side, and a baseline care plan indicating the resident was dependent for eating. Other staff interviews, including with a CNA supervisor, an LPN, the DON, and the Administrator, confirmed that staff were trained at least monthly on residents’ rights, respectful and dignified care, provision of privacy during incontinence care, and the expectation that staff sit beside residents when assisting with eating.
Failure to Maintain Accessible Call Light for a Resident
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to ensure a resident’s call light was maintained within reach as required by the facility’s feeding skills checklist. The skills checklist for feeding a resident specifies that staff must leave the call light within the resident’s reach after feeding. For Resident #2, surveyors observed on two separate occasions that the call light was not accessible. On one observation, the resident was awake in bed with a lunch tray on the overbed table, and the call light was found lying on the floor under the head of the bed. The resident stated he could use his call light but did not know where it was. On a subsequent observation, Resident #2 was again in bed with a lunch tray in front of him, and the call light was hanging behind the mattress at the head of the bed, out of his sight and reach. The resident again stated he could use the call light but did not know where it was. Record review showed the resident had epilepsy, an infection of the skin and subcutaneous tissue, an open wound of the left upper arm, gastrostomy status, and a BIMS score of 11 indicating moderate cognitive impairment. Staff interviews with CNAs, an LPN, the DON, and the Administrator confirmed that call lights were expected to be within residents’ reach and answered timely, and that staff had received in-service training and competency checks on leaving call lights within reach. The Administrator also confirmed there was no specific written policy regarding call light placement.
Failure to Provide Required Perineal Cleansing During Incontinent Care
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to provide incontinent care in accordance with its own peri-care policy and professional standards of practice for a male resident who was dependent for toilet hygiene. The facility’s written policy for peri/incontinent care for male residents, revised in January 2023, required cleansing of the perineal area starting at the urethra and working outward, including washing and rinsing the penis, scrotum, inner thighs, and perineal area front and back, followed by thorough drying. Record review showed the resident had diagnoses including epilepsy, infection of the skin and subcutaneous tissue, an open wound of the left upper arm, and gastrostomy status, and a Quarterly MDS with a BIMS score of 11 indicating moderate cognitive impairment, with the resident assessed as dependent for toilet hygiene. On the observed date and time, CNA #1 provided incontinent care to this resident by removing a wet urine-soaked brief, changing the fitted sheet, and applying a clean, dry brief without cleansing the resident’s perineal area, front or back, contrary to facility policy. During a subsequent interview, CNA #1 acknowledged she had received in-service training and competency check-offs on peri-care and knew she was supposed to cleanse the perineal area but did not do so, stating she was nervous. Additional interviews with CNA #2 (CNA supervisor and scheduler), an LPN, the DON, and the Administrator confirmed that staff were trained using the Peri Care–Incontinent Care Skills Checklist and that proper incontinent care includes cleansing the perineal area, front and back, in addition to changing the brief. The failure to perform the required cleansing during incontinent care constituted the cited deficiency related to prevention of urinary tract infections.
Failure to Maintain Infection Control Practices During PEG Tube and Wound Care
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to implement its infection prevention and control program by not maintaining aseptic technique and not providing ordered dressing changes for residents with PEG tubes and a sacral pressure injury. Facility policies on infection control and clean dressing changes required wound care to be provided in a manner that decreases the potential for infection and cross-contamination, including removal of soiled dressings with gloves, discarding gloves, performing hand hygiene, and donning clean gloves before continuing care. The peri-care audit tool also required glove removal, hand hygiene, and re-gloving after peri-care. These standards were not followed during multiple observed care episodes. For one resident with a PEG tube and diagnoses including Alzheimer’s disease, functional quadriplegia, and gastrostomy status, surveyors observed the PEG tube site without a dressing and with a yellowish-brown substance beneath and around the external skin disk extending about one-fourth inch onto surrounding skin. A CNA and an LPN both confirmed there was no dressing in place and acknowledged the drainage at the site. The LPN stated PEG tube site care should be completed daily and as needed for increased drainage and acknowledged that, with no dressing and the amount of drainage present, there was no way to tell when the site was last cleaned. Record review showed a physician order, effective several months prior, for daily cleansing of the PEG tube stoma with normal saline, patting dry, and applying a dry drain dressing to avoid skin breakdown. For another resident with severe protein-calorie malnutrition and gastrostomy status, the PEG tube site was observed with thick brown, crusted substance beneath the external skin disk extending approximately one-half to three-fourths of an inch to the surrounding area. The resident reported the site had not been cleaned in about three days and later stated they might have to clean it themselves. Follow-up observations confirmed the site remained unclean with visible drainage, and an LPN and the DON both confirmed the presence of thick, brown drainage and that the site had not been cleaned in several days, despite an order for daily cleansing with soap and water, rinsing, patting dry, and leaving open to air or applying a dry dressing if drainage was present. In a separate observation involving a resident with a stage IV sacral pressure ulcer and severe cognitive impairment, a CNA provided peri-care for stool soiling, then immediately assisted with wound care using the same gloves worn during peri-care, without performing hand hygiene or changing gloves. The CNA, treatment nurse, DON, and ADON all acknowledged that hand hygiene and glove change should have occurred between peri-care and wound care and that this represented an infection control concern.
Failure to Maintain Clean Resident Rooms and Shower Facilities
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, as required by its Resident Rights & Quality of Life Policy. For one resident, surveyors observed a bag of odorous soiled linens resting on the floor of the room, and the resident’s bed was made with a bedspread that had a football-sized hole exposing the mattress. The resident, who was cognitively intact with a BIMS score of 14 and had Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, reported that it was not unusual for bags of soiled linens to be left on the floor and for bedding to be damaged. A CNA confirmed that soiled linens were commonly left in bags on the floor after morning care and that torn bedding should not be used, and later placed the bag of soiled linens on the resident’s furniture where his clean clothing was hanging. The resident remained upset the following day, and a dead roach was observed under his bed near the headboard. Additional deficiencies were identified in other resident rooms. One resident with End Stage Renal Disease and a severely impaired cognition (BIMS score of 5) reported that housekeeping did not clean under the bed; surveyors observed three large dead roaches under the bed, which remained there the following day. When the Housekeeping Supervisor later observed the room, five dead roaches were present under the bed, and he stated the area should not have been in that condition. Another resident, with a diffuse traumatic brain injury and a moderately impaired cognition (BIMS score of 10), reported frequently picking up and disposing of dead roaches himself because staff did not remove them, and a large dead roach was observed under his bed. The facility also failed to maintain a clean and sanitary north shower room. During a Resident Council interview, multiple cognitively intact and moderately impaired residents reported refusing to use the shower room due to cleanliness concerns, including observations of dirty clothing, feces, and residue on shower chairs and floors. A housekeeper stated that while she cleaned the shower rooms multiple times a day, CNAs were responsible for cleaning and sanitizing the shower room after each use and that she had observed occasions when CNAs failed to do so. A subsequent observation of the north shower room revealed soiled clothing, including a soiled brief, on a shower chair, a yellow fluid-like substance on the floor and shower chair, and a white powdery substance on the floor, with no staff present. The Social Services Assistant, DON, and Administrator each acknowledged that staff were expected to clean and sanitize the shower room after each use.
Ongoing Roach Activity Demonstrates Ineffective Pest Control Program
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program as required by its pest control policy dated 9/1/2014, which states the center will maintain an ongoing program to keep the building free of insects and rodents. Surveyors observed multiple instances of roach and insect activity in resident rooms and common areas. In one cognitively intact resident’s room, gnats were seen flying and a dead roach was later found under the bed near the headboard. Another resident’s room contained three large dead roaches under the bed on two consecutive days; this resident reported that roaches were regularly seen in the room, especially at night, crawling on the ceiling and falling onto him and his roommate, and that staff had been notified but he had not seen staff respond to assess or treat the issue. A third resident reported seeing roaches on the ceiling and under the bed and stated he often removed dead roaches himself because staff did not; a large dead roach was observed under his bed. A family member of another resident reported feeling it was necessary to bring her own roach spray due to concerns about roaches in the resident’s room and stated she was told she could not keep the spray in the room, expressing concern that the roach problem needed to be addressed. During a Resident Council meeting, two large roaches were observed crawling across the floor, and residents reported that roaches were commonly seen in rooms and common areas, including on walls, ceilings, and floors, particularly at night. The contracted pest control provider reported he provides monthly services, focusing on different areas each visit, primarily treating entry points and exterior areas, and stated he had not personally observed roaches and received only occasional complaints. Facility leadership, including the housekeeping supervisor, DON, and Maintenance Director, described expectations that staff report pest sightings and that pest control services are available monthly and as needed, but the ongoing presence of roaches and dead insects in resident rooms and common areas demonstrated that the pest control program was not effectively preventing or controlling pests.
Failure to Ensure Resident Access to Private Telephone Communication
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure a resident’s right to reasonable access to and privacy in the use of a telephone for communication. Facility policy on Resident Rights, revised December 2016, states that residents are guaranteed access to a telephone, mail, and email, and the ability to communicate in person and by mail, email, and telephone with privacy. Resident #1 was admitted on 12/18/24 with diagnoses including Sjogren syndrome, rheumatoid arthritis, chronic kidney disease, and morbid obesity. During an interview, the resident reported that she had dropped and broken her personal cellular telephone, which she had used for private communication, and that the facility did not have any telephone that was convenient for her to use privately. She stated that no staff had offered her the use of a staff office or any other mechanism for private communication, and she was upset because she relied on telephone contact with her significant other, who had cancer and was unable to visit. Observations and staff interviews confirmed the lack of accessible, private telephone options for residents on South Hall. An observation on the 100 Hall revealed there was no cordless telephone available for resident use. The DON confirmed that the facility did not have a method to provide residents on South Hall with private communication without first making arrangements or an appointment to use a staff office, and that the cordless telephones in the facility did not have sufficient range to reach South Hall. The SSD confirmed there were no cordless telephones at the South Hall nurses’ station that could be taken to residents’ rooms and acknowledged that Resident #1’s cell phone had been broken and sent out for repair. The Administrator also confirmed that residents on South Hall did not have a method for private communication without prior arrangements and acknowledged that access to private communication is a guaranteed resident right.
Failure to Provide Adequate ADL Assistance for Personal Hygiene
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide necessary assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs) to maintain personal hygiene for one resident who was dependent on staff for care. Facility policy on ADLs, revised March 2018, stated that residents unable to carry out ADLs independently would receive services necessary to maintain good grooming and personal and oral hygiene. Record review showed the resident was admitted with heart failure, chronic kidney disease, and hypertension, had a BIMS score of 12 indicating moderate cognitive impairment, was always incontinent of bowel and bladder, and required substantial/maximal assistance for personal hygiene and was dependent for toilet hygiene. A complainant reported that the resident had expressed difficulty getting staff to provide assistance with ADLs. During an observation and interview with the resident, accompanied by an LPN, the resident reported ongoing difficulty obtaining assistance with ADLs. The surveyor observed that the resident had ten long, dirty fingernails protruding 3.0 to 3.5 millimeters past the fingertips, with a black substance beneath all fingernails; the resident stated they needed cleaning and cutting and were too long. The LPN described the fingernails as too long and dirty, confirmed that nursing staff were responsible for checking fingernails daily during care and weekly during body audits, and acknowledged that staff were responsible for providing fingernail care as part of ADLs. The LPN also confirmed that long, dirty, unkempt fingernails had the potential to cause damage or scratches to the resident’s skin. The DON stated she was not aware of any complaints from the resident but confirmed her expectation that ADLs for residents dependent on staff for personal hygiene would be maintained and provided as needed, and that licensed nurses trimmed fingernails for some residents while any nursing staff could clean under fingernails. The Administrator confirmed that personal hygiene and grooming were part of resident ADLs and were expected to be provided for all dependent residents.
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.
