Shaire Nursing Center
Inspection history, citations, penalties and survey trends for this long-term care facility in Lenoir, North Carolina.
- Location
- 1450 Shaire Center Drive, Lenoir, North Carolina 28645
- CMS Provider Number
- 345483
- Inspections on file
- 15
- Latest survey
- August 13, 2025
- Citations (last 12 mo.)
- 5
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Shaire Nursing Center during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident with moderate cognitive impairment who used a wheelchair as her primary mobility device was observed with a damaged left armrest, which caused skin irritation. Despite the issue being visible and reported by a nurse aide to rehabilitation staff, the repair was not communicated to the maintenance department, and the problem persisted. Staff interviews revealed a lack of awareness and communication regarding the repair process, resulting in the resident continuing to use the wheelchair in disrepair.
A resident with anxiety disorder and severely impaired cognition had an active PRN lorazepam order without the required 14-day stop date, despite staff awareness of CMS guidelines. The order remained in effect for over a month, even after the resident was started on scheduled lorazepam, due to an oversight by the Medical Director and Consultant Pharmacist.
Two residents had inaccuracies in their MDS assessments: one was incorrectly coded as having an indwelling catheter and frequent urinary incontinence after the catheter had been discontinued, and another was coded as receiving anticoagulants despite not receiving them during the required look-back period. The MDS Coordinator and DON confirmed the coding errors.
A Consultant Pharmacist did not identify or report a drug regimen irregularity for a resident with anxiety disorder and severely impaired cognition, who had both a PRN and scheduled lorazepam order without a stop date for the PRN medication. The PRN order remained active but unused after the scheduled dose began, and the omission was attributed to pharmacist oversight despite facility expectations and CMS guidelines.
Three staff members failed to wear gowns as required by Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) while performing or assisting with wound care for two residents with open wounds. Despite EBP policies, signage, and prior education, staff either misunderstood the requirements or neglected to use gowns during high-contact care activities, resulting in noncompliance with infection control protocols.
Staff failed to immediately report a resident's allegation of being hit, resulting in delayed notification to the DON and Administrator, and subsequent delays in reporting to authorities and initiating an investigation, contrary to facility policy.
A resident with heart failure and diabetes was discharged from hospice care, but the facility failed to complete a Significant Change in Status Assessment. The MDS Coordinator was not informed of the discharge, and assessments continued to be coded for hospice care. The Administrator and DON were unaware of the discharge, leading to inaccurate MDS coding.
A facility failed to accurately code MDS assessments for three residents, leading to deficiencies in hospice care, falls, and discharge documentation. One resident was incorrectly coded as receiving hospice care after discharge, another's fall history was not reflected in their MDS, and a planned discharge was inaccurately marked as unplanned. These errors were attributed to communication gaps and human oversight by the MDS Coordinator.
Failure to Maintain Wheelchair in Good Repair for Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain a resident's wheelchair in good repair, resulting in a torn, ripped, and cracked vinyl cover on the left armrest. The resident, who had moderate cognitive impairment and relied on a wheelchair as her primary mobility device, was observed on multiple occasions with her left arm in contact with the damaged armrest. The resident reported that the damaged armrest irritated her skin at times and expressed a desire for it to be fixed. Weekly skin assessments indicated her skin was intact during the review period, and staff confirmed there was no redness or open areas at the time of observation. Despite the visible damage, nursing and aide staff either did not notice the issue or, when it was noticed, did not ensure the repair was reported and addressed. The nurse aide stated she had reported the issue to rehabilitation staff weeks prior, but the rehabilitation director denied receiving any such report. The maintenance department, responsible for repairs, was not made aware of the problem and did not conduct routine checks for wheelchair repair needs, instead relying on staff to submit work orders. Facility leadership, including the DON and Administrator, expected staff to be attentive to residents' mobility devices and to report repair needs promptly, but this did not occur in this instance.
PRN Psychotropic Medication Order Lacked Required 14-Day Stop Date
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a PRN (as needed) psychotropic medication, lorazepam, prescribed for a resident with anxiety disorder, included a required 14-day stop date as per CMS guidelines. The resident, who had severely impaired cognition and a history of anxiety, was admitted with both scheduled and PRN orders for lorazepam, both entered by the Medical Director without a stop date for the PRN order. Review of the medication administration records showed that the PRN lorazepam order remained active for over a month without being administered, even after the resident was started on a scheduled lorazepam regimen. Staff interviews revealed that nursing staff were aware of the ongoing PRN lorazepam order and the requirement for a 14-day stop date for PRN psychotropic medications. However, the nurse involved believed the rules may have changed when she noticed the missing stop date. The DON and Administrator both confirmed that the PRN lorazepam order should have included a 14-day stop date and attributed the oversight to the Medical Director and Consultant Pharmacist, rather than a systemic failure.
Inaccurate MDS Coding for Bladder, Bowel, and Medication Status
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to accurately code Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments for two residents in the areas of bladder and bowel status, and medication administration. For one resident, the nursing progress note indicated that a urinary catheter was discontinued per order without difficulty or complaint, yet the admission MDS assessment incorrectly coded the resident as having an indwelling catheter and being frequently incontinent of urine. The MDS Coordinator acknowledged that the assessment should have reflected the absence of a catheter and that the incontinence status was auto-populated based on nurse aide responses. For another resident, the quarterly MDS assessment was coded to indicate the use of anticoagulant medication. However, a review of the Medication Administration Record showed that the resident only received an anticoagulant for three days, and not during the required 7-day look-back period for the assessment. The MDS Coordinator confirmed that the resident should not have been coded as receiving anticoagulants, as the medication had been discontinued prior to the look-back period. The Director of Nursing also confirmed that both assessments should have been coded accurately.
Consultant Pharmacist Failed to Identify and Report PRN Lorazepam Order Irregularity
Penalty
Summary
A Consultant Pharmacist failed to identify and report a drug regimen irregularity for one of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The resident in question was admitted with an anxiety disorder and had severely impaired cognition. Physician orders included both a PRN (as needed) lorazepam 0.5 mg every 4 hours for anxiety and a scheduled lorazepam 0.5 mg four times daily, both initiated on the same date. The PRN lorazepam order did not have a stop date and remained active in the electronic health record, although it had not been administered since the scheduled lorazepam was started. During the monthly Medication Regimen Review, the Consultant Pharmacist did not make any recommendations regarding the lack of a stop date for the PRN lorazepam order, despite being aware of CMS guidelines requiring such a stop date. Interviews with facility staff, including the DON and Administrator, confirmed their expectation that the Consultant Pharmacist would identify and report such irregularities. The Consultant Pharmacist acknowledged the oversight and could not explain why a recommendation was not made.
Failure to Follow Enhanced Barrier Precautions During Wound Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to follow its infection control policies and procedures for Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) during wound care for residents who met the criteria for these precautions. Specifically, three out of six staff members observed and reviewed for infection control practices did not wear a gown while performing or assisting with wound care, as required by the facility's EBP policy. The policy mandates the use of gloves and gowns for high-contact resident care activities, including wound care for residents with open wounds or indwelling medical devices, even if the resident is not known to be infected or colonized with a multidrug-resistant organism (MDRO). During wound care for a resident with a stage 2 pressure ulcer, a nurse was observed performing hand hygiene and using gloves but did not don a gown at any point during the procedure. The nurse later stated she believed a gown was unnecessary because the wound was not open, although she acknowledged the resident should have been on EBP. Another nurse who regularly performed wound care for the same resident was unaware that EBP was required for residents with open wounds and had not been informed by the Infection Preventionist. The Infection Preventionist was also unaware that the resident's pressure ulcer was open and confirmed that EBP should have been initiated when the wound was identified. In a separate incident, another nurse and a nurse aide performed wound care on a different resident without wearing gowns, despite EBP signage and PPE being available outside the resident's room. The nurse aide believed gowns were only necessary for incontinence care, and the nurse admitted he forgot to wear a gown due to being in a hurry, though he knew it was required. Both staff members had previously received education on EBP, but failed to comply with the policy during the observed wound care procedure.
Failure to Immediately Report and Investigate Abuse Allegation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that staff implemented the abuse policy and procedure regarding immediate reporting, investigation, and protection following an allegation of abuse. Specifically, when a resident was found with a bruise on her right shoulder and reported being hit by a woman, nurse aides promptly informed a nurse, who then informed the Nurse Supervisor. However, the Nurse Supervisor delayed reporting the allegation to the Director of Nursing (DON) and the Administrator, as required by facility policy, which defines 'immediately' as within two hours for abuse allegations. The DON and Administrator were not made aware of the incident until informed by the surveyor, resulting in a delay in notifying the State Agency, local law enforcement, and Adult Protective Services (APS), as well as a delay in initiating an investigation. Interviews with staff revealed that the resident gave inconsistent accounts of the incident, but staff acknowledged that the policy required immediate reporting regardless of the resident's changing statements. The DON stated that she would have suspended any suspected staff and begun an investigation had she been notified in a timely manner. The Administrator confirmed that he would have reported the allegation to the appropriate authorities within the required timeframe if he had been informed. The failure to follow the established abuse reporting protocol led to a delay in protective actions and regulatory notifications for the resident involved.
Failure to Complete Significant Change in Status Assessment After Hospice Discharge
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to complete a Significant Change in Status Assessment for a resident who was discharged from hospice care. Resident #3, who had diagnoses including heart failure and diabetes, was admitted to hospice services with a life expectancy of less than six months. The resident was discharged from hospice services and switched to hospice palliative care, which was later discontinued. However, there was no facility documentation indicating that hospice palliative care services had been ordered or discontinued. The MDS Coordinator was not informed about the discharge from hospice and palliative care services, and the most recent assessments continued to be coded for receiving hospice care. The MDS Coordinator stated that a significant change in status assessment should have been completed when hospice services ended. The Administrator and DON were also unaware of the resident's discharge from hospice services and expected the MDS assessments to be coded accurately. This lack of communication and documentation led to the failure to complete the necessary assessment.
Inaccurate MDS Coding for Hospice, Falls, and Discharge
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to accurately code the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments for three residents, leading to deficiencies in the documentation of hospice care, falls, and discharge status. Resident #3 was incorrectly coded as receiving hospice care on quarterly MDS assessments, despite being discharged from hospice and palliative care services. This error was due to a lack of communication to the MDS Coordinator, who relied on nurses and resident charts for information. The Administrator and Director of Nursing were unaware of the discharge, highlighting a gap in communication and documentation. Resident #40's MDS assessment failed to reflect a history of falls with major injury, despite being readmitted to the facility after a fall resulting in a neck fracture. The MDS Coordinator admitted to oversight and human error in not checking the correct boxes. Similarly, Resident #50's discharge was inaccurately coded as unplanned, although it was a planned discharge with home health referrals and follow-up appointments arranged. The MDS Coordinator acknowledged this as another oversight, and the Director of Nursing confirmed the discharge should have been coded as planned.
Latest citations in North Carolina
A resident with hemiplegia after a cerebral infarction and chronic atrial fibrillation was receiving rivaroxaban 20 mg daily as an anticoagulant, as documented in active medication orders, the MDS, and the MAR over several months. However, the comprehensive care plan, from admission through a later update, did not include any problem, goal, or intervention related to anticoagulant use. The MDS Coordinator stated she reviews and updates care plans after MDS completion and acknowledged she had overlooked adding anticoagulant use to the care plan, while the Administrator reported an expectation that all high-risk medications, including anticoagulants, be reflected in resident care plans.
A resident with a chronic heel wound with drainage, classified as high risk under the facility’s Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) policy, received wound care from a Wound Nurse and a NA who wore masks and gloves but did not don gowns during multiple high-contact wound care activities on both lower extremities. The facility’s EBP policy requires both gloves and gowns for high-contact care, including wound care, for residents with chronic wounds. At the time of care, there was no EBP sign on the door and no PPE caddie or supplies outside the room. In subsequent interviews, the Wound Nurse and NA reported they did not wear gowns because there was no sign on the door and the nurse was not wearing one, while the IP and DON stated they would have expected gown use and confirmed that wound care is considered a high-contact activity under the policy.
Over more than a year, residents repeatedly reported during Resident Council meetings that call lights were not answered timely, staff sometimes turned off call lights without meeting needs, ice and water were not passed consistently on all shifts, water pitchers were not washed as expected, and care was not always provided during meal times. Residents also described staff using poor attitudes, including cursing and aggressive tones, and noted that coffee on hall carts was often empty or cold at breakfast. Despite these concerns being raised month after month, residents stated they felt the facility only responded by saying staff were being educated, while the same problems continued. The Social Worker and DON acknowledged that these issues had been discussed numerous times without true resolution, and residents expressed a desire for their needs to be met and for clear feedback from administration about efforts to address their ongoing concerns.
A resident was admitted with documented PTSD and COPD, and hospital records showed PTSD as a chronic condition monitored during hospitalization. Although the care plan and MDS admission assessment identified PTSD as an active psychiatric/mood disorder and the resident received an antidepressant, the PASRR Determination Notification reflected only a Level I PASRR, and the FL2 form from the hospital did not list PTSD. The SW, who was responsible for PASRR submissions, relied on quarterly audits of admission paperwork and the MDS to identify cases needing Level II PASRR, resulting in no timely Level II request being submitted for this resident’s PTSD diagnosis.
Surveyors found multiple opened nutritional supplement containers in unit nourishment refrigerators that were either undated or stored beyond the manufacturer’s specified use-by timeframe. A one-quart shake in one unit refrigerator lacked an opening date despite a label requiring use within four days of opening, while two dated one-quart shakes and an opened, undated diabetic shake in another unit refrigerator were not managed according to their labeled time limits. The DM reported that nursing staff, not dietary, were responsible for dating and discarding resident nutritional shakes, while dietary staff only checked and restocked kitchen-provided items. A nurse and the Administrator both confirmed that the person opening the shake was responsible for dating it and ensuring it was used or discarded within the manufacturer’s guidelines.
A resident with ESRD, peripheral vascular disease, and an AV fistula returned from dialysis with a gauze dressing applied by the dialysis nurse, which remained in place into the following day. A physician order and care plan required nursing staff to remove the AV fistula dressing on the night of dialysis and assess the site for complications and signs of infection. The assigned nurse acknowledged she knew she was required to remove the dressing and assess the site but forgot because she was busy with another resident. The physician emphasized the importance of post-dialysis AV fistula assessment due to the resident’s vascular disease and prior complications, and the DON stated she expected staff to follow the order and routinely assess the fistula site.
A resident admitted with bipolar disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, vascular dementia with severe behavioral disturbance, and active BPSD was maintained on multiple psychotropic medications, including an antipsychotic with a documented contraindication to gradual dose reduction, but only had a Level I PASRR on file. At admission, the SW verified that a PASRR existed in NC MUST but did not confirm that the resident’s mental health diagnoses were captured, and no Level II PASRR request was submitted. The SW reported she relied on prior guidance that a Level I PASRR was sufficient unless there was a change in condition, and the Administrator confirmed the SW was responsible for Level II PASRR submissions, resulting in the failure to obtain a required Level II determination.
A resident with dementia, stroke, dysphagia, and severe cognitive impairment, who was edentulous and dependent for ADLs, was care planned and listed on the NA Kardex to receive assisted oral care at least twice daily. Over nearly a month, NA documentation showed denture care was provided only three times, and surveyors observed the resident’s upper and lower dentures with brown stains and debris buildup. One NA, assigned on several day shifts, believed the resident did not have dentures and only offered mouthwash and a basin, while another NA, aware the resident wore dentures, usually did not perform denture care because the resident was already in bed and did not want to remove them. The DON later confirmed the dentures had visible debris and staining and that the care plan required regular oral care and proper denture cleaning.
The facility failed to ensure residents received their mail in a timely manner, particularly mail delivered on Saturdays. During a council meeting, several residents reported that Saturday mail was not brought to them until Monday. The new Activity Director did not work weekends and was unfamiliar with the weekend mail process. The weekday receptionist stated that the weekend receptionist had no key to the outdoor mailbox, so mail was not retrieved on Saturdays unless the Business Office Manager was present. The Business Office Manager confirmed that when she was absent on weekends, no one else could access or deliver residents’ mail, and that after the prior Activity Director left, there was no designated staff to deliver weekend mail, resulting in periods when residents did not receive their mail on the day it arrived.
The facility failed to maintain and implement its antibiotic stewardship and infection surveillance program, as required by its own policy. For most months reviewed, there were no infection control records, including antibiotic order listings, documentation confirming infections, surveillance logs, or trend analyses, and the only available data for one month was an unstructured list of residents who received antibiotics without formal tracking of infection rates or antibiotic use. The DON, who was also expected to serve as the Infection Preventionist, reported being unable to locate infection control reports or surveillance data for an extended period, and the Administrator confirmed that, during a time of multiple interim DONs, infection control tracking and analysis of infection and antibiotic use trends had not been completed.
Failure to Care Plan for High-Risk Anticoagulant Therapy
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop an individualized comprehensive care plan addressing anticoagulant medication use for a resident who had been prescribed rivaroxaban 20 mg daily with the evening meal for a history of cerebral infarction. The resident was admitted with hemiplegia following a cerebral infarction and chronic atrial fibrillation, and the active medication orders showed continuous administration of rivaroxaban from its start date through the survey review period. The quarterly MDS assessment documented that the resident was receiving an anticoagulant, and the Medication Administration Record confirmed daily administration of rivaroxaban over several months. Despite this ongoing anticoagulant therapy and the resident’s relevant diagnoses, the comprehensive care plan dated at admission and updated later did not include any focus area, goals, or interventions related to anticoagulant use. During an interview, the MDS Coordinator acknowledged that the care plan did not address the anticoagulant medication and stated that she must have overlooked it when updating the care plan after completing the MDS assessment. In a separate interview, the Administrator stated that her expectation was that all resident care plans reflect high-risk medications, including anticoagulants.
Failure to Follow Enhanced Barrier Precautions During Wound Care
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to implement its Infection Control policies and procedures for Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) during wound care for a resident. The facility’s EBP policy, last revised on 04/15/26, requires staff to don both gloves and a gown for high-contact care activities with high-risk residents, including those with chronic wounds. High-contact activities listed in the policy include wound care, and the policy specifies that residents with chronic wounds should remain on EBP for the duration of their stay or until the wound resolves. Resident #12 was admitted with a chronic heel wound with drainage, placing the resident in the high-risk category under the EBP policy. During an observation of wound care on 05/12/26 at 12:33 PM, the Wound Nurse and Nurse Aide (NA) #1 entered the resident’s room wearing masks and gloves but no gowns. There was no EBP sign on the door and no PPE caddie or supplies outside the room. The resident was seated in a wheelchair beside the bed with the door open. The Wound Nurse performed multiple wound care steps on the resident’s right leg, right heel, left third toe, and left heel, repeatedly donning and doffing gloves and performing hand hygiene, while NA #1 assisted by holding the resident’s legs. At no point during these high-contact wound care activities did either staff member wear a gown. In interviews following the observation, the Wound Nurse stated he did not wear a gown because there was no sign on the door indicating the resident was on EBP and later acknowledged learning that a gown should have been worn. NA #1 similarly reported that she did not wear a gown because there was no sign on the door and the Wound Nurse was not wearing one, and she later learned that both should have worn gowns. The Infection Preventionist (IP) stated that the resident should have had an EBP sign on the door and a PPE caddie available, and explained that the sign and supplies were likely left on the resident’s previous room after a move. The IP and the Director of Nursing both stated they would have expected the Wound Nurse and NA #1 to wear gowns while providing wound care, and the DON identified wound care as a high-contact activity requiring gown use under the facility’s EBP policy.
Ongoing Failure to Resolve Resident Council Concerns About Call Lights and Basic Services
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure over a 13‑month period to effectively resolve and communicate resolution of repeated concerns raised in Resident Council meetings, particularly regarding call light response times, staff turning off call lights without meeting needs, inconsistent ice and water pass, and care during meal times. Resident Council minutes from multiple months document that residents, especially those on the 200 hall, repeatedly reported that call lights were not answered in a timely manner and that staff sometimes turned off call lights and left without providing the requested care. Residents also reported that when they turned their call lights back on, staff questioned why they had done so, despite their needs not having been met. These concerns were documented as new issues in successive meetings, indicating that the same problems persisted over time. The Resident Council minutes further show that residents repeatedly complained that ice was not being passed consistently on second and third shifts and on all halls, and that water pitchers were not being washed weekly as expected. At various meetings, residents stated that ice was not being passed daily on all shifts, that ice was not being passed routinely, and that ice was not being passed on every shift. Additional concerns were raised about staff attitudes, including cursing and using an aggressive tone of voice, and about care not being provided during meal times. Residents also reported that coffee on the hall cart was often empty or cold at breakfast. These issues were brought up under both Old Business and New Business in multiple meetings, demonstrating that residents perceived them as ongoing, unresolved problems. During a Resident Council group interview, several residents who lived on the 200 hall and regularly attended the meetings stated they felt the facility did not truly address their concerns because the typical response they heard was that staff were being educated, yet the same problems continued. Multiple residents agreed that call lights not being answered timely was a continual problem and expressed that they wanted resolution and their needs to be met, as well as feedback from administration about efforts made to address their concerns. The Social Worker confirmed that call light response time, passing ice on all shifts, and providing care during meal times had been discussed numerous times and acknowledged there was still no resolution to these issues. The DON acknowledged that grievances from Resident Council regarding clinical issues were assigned to her and that the 200 hall was considered challenging, with residents there being more alert, oriented, and vocal about their needs, but the ongoing nature of the same complaints showed that the facility did not effectively resolve or communicate resolution of the residents’ repeated concerns. The Administrator, who had recently started in the role, stated that they were hoping to achieve resolution of the call light response concerns and that call lights should be answered as quickly as possible, with staff not turning off call lights and failing to return to meet residents’ needs. Despite these stated expectations, the documented Resident Council minutes and resident interviews demonstrate that residents continued to experience and report the same issues over many months. Overall, the deficiency centers on the facility’s inaction and ineffective response to recurring Resident Council complaints, resulting in residents feeling that their concerns about call light response, ice and water service, staff behavior, and care during meals were not being resolved or adequately addressed.
Failure to Request Level II PASRR for Resident With PTSD Diagnosis
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to submit a request for a Level II PASRR evaluation for a resident admitted with a serious mental health disorder. The resident’s hospital course and treatment note documented chronic post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), which was monitored during that hospitalization. A PASRR Determination Notification letter showed the resident only had a Level I PASRR with no expiration date. The North Carolina Medicaid FL2 Level of Care Screening Tool completed by the hospital social worker and sent to the facility did not list PTSD as a diagnosis, even though the resident was admitted with diagnoses including COPD and PTSD. The resident’s care plan, initiated shortly after admission, identified a risk for impairments or complications due to a history of PTSD and included interventions such as approaching the resident calmly, avoiding triggers, building a trusting relationship, obtaining psychiatric referrals as needed, and involving the resident in care decisions. The admission MDS assessment indicated the resident was not considered by the state Level II PASRR process to have a serious mental illness or intellectual disability, but it did list PTSD as an active psychiatric/mood disorder diagnosis and documented that the resident received an antidepressant during the assessment period. The facility social worker, who was responsible for submitting Level II PASRR requests, acknowledged that the resident had a PTSD diagnosis that was not included on the FL2 and stated she conducted PASRR audits on a quarterly basis by reviewing admission paperwork and the MDS to identify diagnoses requiring Level II submission. She reported she was in the process of completing these audits and preparing to submit requests, including one for this resident. The administrator stated that the social worker should have reviewed the admission diagnoses and MDS triggers and requested a Level II PASRR evaluation for the resident’s PTSD at the time of admission or within a month of admission or new diagnosis, rather than waiting for quarterly audits.
Failure to Date and Discard Opened Nutritional Supplements per Manufacturer Instructions
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to properly date and discard opened containers of nutritional supplements stored in nourishment room refrigerators on the North and South Units. During observations of these refrigerators with the Dietary Manager, surveyors found a one-quart nutritional shake in the North Unit refrigerator with no date indicating when it was opened, despite the manufacturer’s label stating it must be used within four days after opening if refrigerated. In the South Unit refrigerator, surveyors observed two one-quart nutritional shakes dated 4/24 and 4/28, both beyond the manufacturer’s four-day use-by period, as well as an opened and undated 8-ounce diabetic nutritional shake whose label required use within 48 hours of opening. In interviews, the Dietary Manager stated that dietary staff did not stock the nutritional shakes in the nourishment refrigerators and that nurses were responsible for the nutritional shakes given to residents, including dating them when opened and discarding them when past the use-by date. The Dietary Manager also explained that dietary staff checked the nourishment refrigerators twice daily only for items provided by the kitchen, including restocking and checking expiration dates on those snacks and drinks. A nurse confirmed that a physician’s order was required for a resident to receive a nutritional shake and that nurses were responsible for dating the shakes when opened and ensuring they were used and discarded according to the manufacturer’s instructions. The Administrator stated that the person who opened a nutritional shake was responsible for writing the date opened on the container and noted that historically dietary staff checked dates on food and drinks stored in the nourishment refrigerators.
Failure to Remove Dialysis AV Fistula Dressing and Perform Ordered Assessment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to follow a physician’s order to remove a dressing and visually assess a resident’s arteriovenous (AV) fistula after dialysis. The resident, who had diagnoses including AV fistula, end stage renal disease, dialysis, and peripheral vascular disease, was cognitively intact and received dialysis. A physician order dated 2/2/2026 directed staff to remove the dressing to the AV fistula on the night of dialysis every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday to avoid skin breakdown and damage to the AV fistula. The resident’s care plan, updated on 2/27/2026, included interventions to check and change the AV fistula dressing as ordered and to observe the site for signs and symptoms of infection. On observation, the resident was noted to have a gauze dressing with tape on the left upper arm AV fistula the day after dialysis, and the resident reported that the dressing had been applied by the dialysis nurse after treatment. The nurse assigned to the resident on the 3:00 PM to 11:00 PM shift acknowledged that she was supposed to remove the dressing and assess the AV fistula site when the resident returned from dialysis but stated she forgot because she was busy with another resident. The physician stated that it was important for nursing staff to remove the dressing and assess the AV fistula after dialysis due to the resident’s significant vascular disease and history of complications with hypotension and falls after dialysis, and described the AV fistula as the resident’s lifeline. The DON stated that nursing staff usually removed the dressing and assessed the AV fistula site after dialysis and that she expected staff to follow physician orders and assess for signs and symptoms of infection.
Failure to Request Level II PASRR Evaluation for Resident With Serious Mental Illness
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to submit a request for a Level II PASRR evaluation for a resident admitted with serious mental health disorders. A PASRR Determination Notification letter showed the resident had only a Level I PASRR with no expiration date. The resident was admitted with diagnoses including bipolar disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, and vascular dementia with severe behavioral disturbance. A psychiatric progress note documented a long history of bipolar disorder and recent behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia, with active diagnoses of bipolar disorder, bipolar depression, and generalized anxiety disorder. The resident was receiving multiple psychotropic medications, including duloxetine, clonazepam, quetiapine (in both morning and bedtime doses), and trazodone. The admission MDS assessment indicated the resident was not considered by the state Level II PASRR process to have a serious mental illness or intellectual disability, despite active psychiatric/mood disorder diagnoses of anxiety disorder and bipolar disorder and ongoing antipsychotic use with a physician-documented contraindication to gradual dose reduction. An NC MUST inquiry confirmed that only a Level I PASRR, effective more than a year prior, was on file and that no PASRR requests for a Level II determination had been submitted prior to the survey date. The Social Worker reported that she checked NC MUST for a current PASRR at admission but did not verify whether mental health diagnoses were included in the initial screening, and she relied on prior guidance from a PASRR evaluator that a Level I PASRR was sufficient unless there was a change in condition. The Administrator stated the Social Worker was responsible for submitting Level II PASRR requests and acknowledged that, based on this prior guidance, a Level II request for this resident was not completed.
Failure to Provide Ordered Denture and Oral Care for Dependent Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide ordered assistance with denture and oral care for a dependent resident with severe cognitive impairment, dementia, stroke, dysphagia, and edentulism. The resident’s admission MDS documented severely impaired cognition, a need for setup or clean-up assistance with oral hygiene, and no refusal of care or behaviors. The care plan and NA Kardex both directed staff to provide or assist with oral care at least twice daily using a soft toothbrush or foam swabs, and identified the resident as at risk for oral and dental health problems and dependent in ADL self-care. However, NA documentation showed denture care was recorded as provided only three times over nearly a month-long period. During observation, the resident reported wearing upper and lower dentures and displayed dentures with brown stains and debris buildup around the teeth and gums, stating he could brush his dentures if he had a toothbrush and toothpaste. One NA, assigned on multiple day shifts, stated she provided only mouthwash and a basin because the resident had difficulty brushing, believed the resident did not have dentures, and confirmed she had not provided denture care. Another NA on night shift acknowledged knowing the resident wore dentures, having seen them on the bed or nightstand, but stated she usually did not perform denture care because the resident was already in bed and did not want to remove them, and described denture care only as soaking them overnight. When the DON later observed the dentures, he confirmed visible debris and brown staining, and acknowledged that the care plan and Kardex required oral care at least twice daily and that dentures should be brushed and soaked overnight.
Failure to Ensure Timely Weekend Mail Delivery to Residents
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to ensure residents’ right to receive mail, including mail delivered on Saturdays. During a Resident Council group interview, several residents reported that when mail was delivered to the facility on Saturdays, it was not distributed to them until Monday by the Activity Director. Multiple residents agreed with this account, and no residents present disagreed. The new Activity Director, who had transitioned from working as a Certified Occupational Therapist Assistant on 04/24/26, stated she did not work weekends and was unsure how mail delivery to residents was handled on weekends. Staff interviews further showed that the weekend receptionist did not have a key to the outdoor mailbox and therefore could not retrieve Saturday mail. The weekday Receptionist reported that she collected the mail from the outdoor mailbox on Monday mornings and gave it to the Business Office Manager, after which the Activity Director delivered it to residents. The Business Office Manager confirmed that if she was not at work on weekends, no one else had access to the outdoor mailbox. She stated she worked most Saturdays, checked and sorted the mail, and then gave residents’ mail to activity staff or delivered it herself, but noted that after the previous Activity Director left 6–7 weeks earlier, there was no one designated to deliver mail to residents on weekends when she was not present. The Administrator acknowledged that there were approximately three weeks when weekend mail was not delivered to residents due to turnover in the activity department and the absence of an Activity Director.
Failure to Maintain Facility-Wide Antibiotic Stewardship and Infection Surveillance
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to implement a facility-wide system to monitor antibiotic use as required by its Antibiotic Stewardship Program policy. The policy, last revised in December 2016, required that all clinical infections treated with antibiotics undergo review by the Infection Preventionist or designee, including review of antibiotic utilization, antibiotic orders, clinical documentation confirming infections, infection surveillance logs, microbiology testing, and trends in infection and antibiotic use data. Surveyors found that for eight of nine months reviewed—July, August, September, October, November, and December 2025, and February and March 2026—the facility was unable to provide any infection control data, including listings of antibiotic orders, clinical documentation confirming infections, surveillance logs, or trending of infections. For January 2026, the facility had only a list of residents who exhibited symptoms and were treated with antibiotics, but did not use a structured tool to track infection rates, antibiotic use, or to monitor, conduct surveillance, or identify trends related to infections or possible infections. During interviews, the DON, who assumed the position on April 13, 2026 and was also expected to function as the Infection Preventionist, reported being unable to locate Infection Control reports, surveillance records, or infection tracking data for July 2025 through April 2026, except for the January list of residents who received antibiotics. The Administrator confirmed that multiple interim DONs had served since July 2025 and acknowledged that tracking of infection control data, including infection trends and antibiotic use, had not been completed, despite the facility’s stated intent for a comprehensive Infection Control Program that included surveillance, tracking, and trend analysis.
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.
