Monument Healthcare Millcreek
Inspection history, citations, penalties and survey trends for this long-term care facility in Salt Lake City, Utah.
- Location
- 1201 East 4500 South, Salt Lake City, Utah 84117
- CMS Provider Number
- 465139
- Inspections on file
- 17
- Latest survey
- January 21, 2026
- Citations (last 12 mo.)
- 10
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Monument Healthcare Millcreek during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident with complex cardiac, renal, and nutritional conditions received evening TPN ordered with pharmacy instructions that conflicted between the electronic order summary and the pharmacy label regarding total volume, rate, and duration. An agency RN initiated the TPN, reported not finding an IV pump, and manually regulated the infusion via roller clamp instead of using the pump that was later confirmed to be in the room. The TPN, which was ordered to infuse over many hours with tapering, was instead delivered over roughly 3 hours, and the oncoming RN later found the bag empty and connected directly to the PICC line without the pump. Subsequent documentation showed marked changes in the resident’s neuro status and vital signs, including lethargy, altered mental status, elevated HR and BP, hyperglycemia, and complaints of chest pain, leading to EMS transfer and hospital admission. The facility’s investigation substantiated that the TPN was administered incorrectly as a bolus, and the PN policy requiring controlled, tapered infusion was not followed, while the transfer documentation did not note the TPN bolus when the resident was sent to the hospital.
A resident with sepsis and kidney stones was managed on PRN morphine for pain, but two concurrent PRN orders for morphine 15 mg (0.5 tablet q3h and 1 tablet q3h) were entered, creating a potential daily dose of up to 180 mg without clarification. Despite documentation of slurred speech, lethargy, low O2 sats, cough, and shortness of breath, and a provider note attributing intermittent dysarthria to morphine and indicating the need to reduce dosing unless pain exceeded 4, no updated morphine order was found. Nursing staff continued to administer 15 mg doses based largely on the resident’s requests and subjective pain scores, without resolving the conflicting orders or consistently consulting the provider, and the resident was ultimately transferred to the ED in critical condition, where opiate toxicity was diagnosed and treated with naloxone.
Three residents experienced deficiencies in medication management, including administration of blood pressure medications outside of physician-ordered parameters and missed doses of a diabetes medication due to pharmacy and documentation issues. The DON and LPN confirmed that medications were given when they should have been held or were not administered as scheduled, and that proper physician notification and documentation were lacking.
Seven public bathrooms accessible to residents were observed to lack call light systems, preventing residents from being able to call for staff assistance while using these facilities. The Director of Maintenance confirmed that these bathrooms were accessible to residents and did not have call lights installed, stating he was unaware of the requirement.
A resident with diabetes and other complex medical needs missed several scheduled doses of Trulicity due to pharmacy and supply issues, but the physician was not immediately notified of these missed doses. Documentation showed delays in both medication administration and provider notification, and staff interviews confirmed that the required immediate communication with the physician did not occur.
A resident admitted with surgical wounds and dressings on both feet did not receive wound care orders until nine days after admission, despite having a care plan noting the risk for skin breakdown and documented wounds. The admitting nurse did not obtain or verify wound care orders upon admission, and no wound care was documented until orders were finally received from the physician.
A resident with multiple serious health conditions did not receive several scheduled doses of IV Vancomycin, as ordered for treatment of bacterial arthritis and MRSA. The MAR showed missed or undocumented doses, with no corresponding nurse notes to explain the omissions. Nursing staff confirmed that missed doses should be documented and reported, but this was not done, resulting in a significant medication error.
A resident with multiple health conditions receiving IV Vancomycin had several high trough lab results, but there was no documentation that the physician was notified of these abnormal values. Staff interviews confirmed that the process required physician notification and documentation, but records did not show this occurred.
A resident with multiple complex diagnoses had a STAT KUB x-ray ordered and performed due to abdominal symptoms, but the signed and dated x-ray report was not filed in the clinical record. Staff interviews revealed inconsistencies in the process for handling and filing diagnostic results, resulting in the required documentation being unavailable in the resident's chart.
A resident with MRSA, wounds, and a PICC line was not placed on appropriate contact precautions, as required by facility policy and CDC guidance. Staff were unclear about the differences between Enhanced Barrier Precautions and Contact Precautions, and the resident participated in therapy sessions outside their room without proper signage or PPE protocols in place, resulting in a breakdown of the infection prevention and control program.
Unsafe TPN Administration via Gravity Drip and Order Discrepancies
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the unsafe and inappropriate administration of TPN/IV fluids to a cognitively intact resident with multiple complex medical conditions, including CHF, chronic pulmonary edema, chronic kidney disease, kidney transplant status, malnutrition, intestinal fistula, and electrolyte disorders. The resident had an order for evening TPN with pharmacy instructions specifying a compounded volume of 1800 ml, including start and end taper periods, and a total run period of 16 hours. However, the pharmacy label on the TPN bag directed infusion of 1800 ml at 125 ml/hr over 12 hours, and there were discrepancies between the pharmacy order summary (with tapering start and end rates and volumes) and the label directions. The DON later acknowledged that the label directions did not match the calculated infusion time for the stated volume and rate and that there was confusion in how the order was written. On the evening of the incident, an agency RN initiated the resident’s ordered TPN infusion between approximately 7:30 PM and 8:00 PM. The agency RN reported that an IV pump was not present in the room and manually calculated the drip rate, regulating the infusion via the roller clamp and counting drips per minute, rather than using an IV pump. It was later confirmed that an IV pump was in fact present in the room. The agency RN did not document or report the duration of infusion used to calculate the drip rate. Between 10:00 PM and 10:30 PM, the agency RN reported that the TPN bag was about half full before leaving the shift. At around 10:00 PM, the oncoming facility RN assumed care of the hallway and later, at approximately 11:01 PM, entered the resident’s room and found the TPN bag empty, connected directly to the PICC line and not routed through the IV pump. The progress note documented that the resident had already received the full TPN volume even though it was scheduled to run over 12 hours, and the facility’s abuse investigation determined that the TPN had infused over about 3 hours and 15 minutes instead of the ordered 12 hours. Following the rapid infusion, the resident’s condition changed. At about 11:01 PM, the resident’s blood sugar was documented as 450, and vital signs and neuro checks were performed, with subsequent neurological assessments showing elevated HR, elevated BP, increased RR, and progressive changes in level of consciousness and motor response from baseline over the night and into the morning. The resident became lethargic with altered mental status, was more difficult to arouse, and later complained of chest pain, headache, nausea, and confusion. A physiatry follow-up note described the resident as lethargic, arousable only to loud voice and tactile stimulation, and reporting constant sharp chest pain. EMS was called later that morning due to chest pain, low BP, fever, and high HR, and the resident was transferred to the hospital, where she was noted to be febrile, tachycardic, initially hypotensive, and confused, with differential diagnoses including sepsis and line sepsis. The facility’s emergency transfer form did not document that the resident had received a TPN bolus the prior night, and the hospital documentation did not reflect that the TPN bolus and associated change in condition had been communicated. The facility’s own investigation substantiated that the resident received TPN incorrectly as a bolus over a short period rather than as ordered. The facility’s PN policy required that PN be tapered up over 1–2 hours, run at a set rate for a determined time, and then tapered down over 1–2 hours, and specifically stated that PN should never be stopped suddenly and that tapering is needed to prevent hypoglycemia. The pharmacy order summary for this resident’s TPN included start and end taper periods and a total run period of 16 hours, but the pharmacy label and the way the order was presented created inconsistencies in the documented volume, rate, and duration. The DON acknowledged that the nurse should have clarified the discrepancies with the pharmacy and followed up with the physician. The DON also confirmed that the TPN label indicated infusion at 125 ml/hr with a total volume and duration that did not mathematically align, and that there was confusion with the order as written. Despite these documented inconsistencies and the presence of an IV pump in the room, the TPN was administered via gravity drip and infused in a fraction of the intended time, leading to a substantiated medication administration error and associated change in the resident’s condition.
Failure to Manage PRN Morphine Orders Safely Resulting in Opiate Toxicity
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to provide pain management in accordance with professional standards of practice for a resident receiving morphine, resulting in opiate toxicity and hospitalization. The resident was admitted with sepsis, obstructive and reflux uropathy, and kidney stones, and had an existing order for immediate-release morphine 7.5 mg every 6 hours as needed for dorsalgia. On admission, medication reconciliation was completed with the family and primary care physician records. Shortly after admission, the resident complained of ongoing pain and requested more morphine than he was receiving. On 1/3, nursing documentation reflected instructions to give 0.5 tablet by mouth every 3 hours for pain and 1 tablet by mouth every 3 hours as needed for pain, and physician orders were entered for morphine sulfate 15 mg, both 0.5 tablet every 3 hours PRN and 1 tablet every 3 hours PRN, creating two active PRN orders for the same opioid at different doses and the same frequency. The new morphine orders significantly increased the potential daily morphine exposure. Based on the prescribed frequency and dosage, there was a potential for up to 180 mg of morphine to be administered in a 24-hour period, representing an increase of 150 mg per 24 hours from the prior regimen. On 1/5, the physician documented that the resident’s family reported slurred speech, and the physician assessed that there was intermittent dysarthria likely caused by morphine and stated that the morphine should be reduced unless needed for pain levels higher than 4; however, no updated morphine order reflecting this change was found in the medical record. Subsequent nursing notes documented clinical changes, including lethargy, slurred or unclear speech, low oxygen saturations, cough, shortness of breath, and the need for supplemental oxygen and nebulizer treatments. Despite these changes and the physician’s concern about morphine-related dysarthria, the dual PRN morphine orders remained, and there was no documented clarification or consolidation of the opioid orders. In the days leading up to the resident’s transfer to the hospital, the MAR showed administration of 15 mg morphine tablets with pain scores of 10, 7, and 4, totaling 45 mg in a 24-hour period. On the morning of transfer, nursing documented that the resident appeared lethargic, had cold extremities, and that oxygen saturation could not be obtained despite oxygen being titrated up to 5 L/min, with staff reporting a significant decline compared to the prior day. The resident was transferred to the ED for further evaluation. In the ED, the provider documented that the resident arrived critically ill with hypoxia, slow respiratory rate, confusion, and minimal responsiveness, and noted that the resident had been receiving extra doses above the 0.5 tablet of morphine he was supposed to be getting at least once or twice a day. The ED provider diagnosed opiate toxicity along with hypoxia and sepsis, and the resident responded to naloxone with improvement in respiratory rate, oxygenation, and blood pressure. Interviews with an LPN and the DON revealed that nurses relied heavily on resident request and subjective pain reports to administer morphine, did not consistently question high-frequency opioid orders, and did not obtain provider clarification when two different PRN orders for the same opioid existed, contributing to the unsafe pain management that led to opiate toxicity. Interviews further clarified the facility’s practices and expectations around opioid administration and order management. The LPN stated that when receiving a physician order, he would repeat it back and then enter it into the record, and that he typically would follow up with a provider if he encountered a morphine order more frequent than every 4–6 hours. However, in this case, he did not follow up with the provider regarding the every-3-hour morphine orders because the resident had been on morphine for some time and appeared to be tolerating it. He also stated that he administered morphine based on resident request, even when pain levels were low, and that on the day of the resident’s decline he gave the higher dose at the resident’s request despite lethargy. The DON stated she expected nurses to use nursing judgment and to contact the physician when there were two different orders for the same opioid, and acknowledged that the morphine order should have been written as a range (0.5 to 1 tablet every 3 hours). The combination of unclarified duplicate PRN morphine orders, lack of documented adjustment after the physician’s concern about morphine-related dysarthria, and reliance on resident preference without adequate clinical reassessment or provider consultation led to excessive morphine dosing and the resident’s opiate toxicity.
Failure to Adhere to Physician-Ordered Medication Parameters and Timely Administration
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that each resident’s drug regimen was free from unnecessary drugs, as defined by administration outside of physician-ordered parameters, missed doses, and lack of adequate monitoring. For three residents, there were documented instances where blood pressure medications were administered despite vital signs being outside the prescribed hold parameters. Specifically, one resident with hypertensive chronic kidney disease, hemiplegia, and atrial fibrillation received Metoprolol Tartrate on six occasions when either systolic blood pressure or heart rate was below the physician’s specified threshold for holding the medication. Another resident with diagnoses including orthopedic aftercare, diabetes, and morbid obesity did not receive her prescribed Dulaglutide injections as scheduled for three weeks following admission. The delay was attributed to pharmacy delivery issues and insurance coverage, with documentation showing missed doses and late administration. The resident reported the missed doses, and the nurse confirmed difficulties in obtaining the medication, but there was inconsistent documentation of physician notification and follow-up. A third resident with multiple cardiac conditions, including atrial fibrillation and congestive heart failure, received both Metoprolol Succinate ER and Amiodarone HCl on several occasions when blood pressure or heart rate was below the ordered parameters for holding the medications. Interviews with the DON confirmed that medications should have been held according to the physician’s orders, and that the administration outside of these parameters was not in compliance with the prescribed regimen.
Lack of Call Light Systems in Public Bathrooms
Penalty
Summary
The facility was found to be inadequately equipped to allow residents to call for staff assistance in public bathrooms, as none of the seven public bathrooms accessible to residents were equipped with a call light system. Observations on 11/20/25 revealed that multiple public bathrooms, including those in the 300 and 400 hallways, near the nurse's station, staff break room, Human Resource office, front desk, Administration hallway, and activities room, did not contain call lights. These bathrooms were not locked, making them accessible to residents at any time. During an interview, the Director of Maintenance confirmed the absence of call lights in these bathrooms and stated that he was unaware of the requirement to have them installed.
Failure to Immediately Notify Physician of Missed Diabetes Medication
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency was identified when the facility failed to immediately inform or consult with a resident's physician regarding a significant change in the resident's treatment, specifically related to the administration of Trulicity (Dulaglutide) for diabetes management. The resident, who had diagnoses including orthopedic aftercare following amputation, Type 2 diabetes mellitus, and morbid obesity, reported missing three weeks of Trulicity injections upon admission. Medical record review showed that the medication was not administered as scheduled on multiple occasions due to pharmacy delivery issues and lab results, with documentation indicating delays and missed doses. Despite these missed doses, there was no immediate notification to the resident's physician at the time the medication was unavailable. Provider notification occurred 24 hours after a scheduled dose was missed, and in other instances, the medication was either awaited from the pharmacy or arrangements were made for a family member to bring it in. Interviews with facility staff, including an LPN and the DON, confirmed that the physician was not promptly notified as required when the medication was not available, and the DON was unaware that multiple doses had been missed.
Delay in Initiation of Wound Care Orders for Newly Admitted Resident
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency was identified when a resident was admitted with wounds and dressings on both feet, but did not have wound care orders initiated until nine days after admission. The resident had a complex medical history, including arthritis due to bacteria in the left ankle and foot, MRSA, diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney disease, congestive heart failure, pain, and edema. Upon admission, the resident's hospital discharge orders did not include wound care instructions, but the nursing assessment documented the presence of surgical incisions and dressings. The care plan noted the potential for skin breakdown and included interventions to administer treatments as ordered and monitor for effectiveness. Despite these documented needs, there was no evidence that wound care was provided or that orders were obtained until nine days after admission, when a physician finally ordered specific wound care procedures. Interviews with staff revealed that the admitting nurse is responsible for reviewing discharge orders, documenting wounds, and obtaining necessary wound care orders, but this process was not followed in this case. The Director of Nursing confirmed that the expectation is for the admitting nurse to follow up with the physician for wound care orders if they are not present at admission.
Missed Vancomycin Doses and Lack of Documentation
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency occurred when a resident with multiple complex medical conditions, including bacterial arthritis, MRSA, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and congestive heart failure, did not receive several scheduled doses of Vancomycin as ordered by their physician. The resident, who had a PICC line for intravenous antibiotics, reported that three doses of Vancomycin were missed. Review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) showed that on four occasions, Vancomycin doses were either marked with codes indicating 'see Nurse Note' or 'HOLD see Nurse Note,' or lacked any documentation of administration or reason for omission. No corresponding nurse progress notes were found to explain why the medication was not given or held on these dates. Interviews with nursing staff and the Director of Nursing revealed that the expected protocol was to notify the physician of any missed medication doses and document the reason in a progress note. The LPN interviewed stated that a code indicating a missed dose should be accompanied by a detailed progress note, and that missing documentation in the MAR should be flagged for review by nursing leadership. Despite these expectations, there was no documentation to account for the missed Vancomycin doses, resulting in the resident not being free from significant medication errors.
Failure to Notify Physician of Critical Lab Results
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency was identified when the facility failed to notify the ordering physician of laboratory results that were outside the clinical reference ranges for one resident. The resident, who had a complex medical history including bacterial arthritis, MRSA, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, congestive heart failure, pain, and edema, was receiving intravenous Vancomycin therapy via a PICC line. Multiple Vancomycin trough levels were reported as high on several occasions, but there was no documentation that the physician was notified of these abnormal results. Interviews with staff confirmed that the process required notification of the physician and documentation in the progress notes when lab results were abnormal. However, review of the resident's records did not show any evidence that the physician was informed of the high Vancomycin trough levels, nor was there documentation of any pharmacy recommendations for dose adjustment. The DON confirmed that such notifications and documentation should have occurred.
Failure to File Signed and Dated Diagnostic Report in Resident Record
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency was identified when the facility failed to file a signed and dated report of a radiological diagnostic service in a resident's clinical record. The resident, who had a history of traumatic subdural hemorrhage with loss of consciousness, quadriplegia, spinal stenosis, and post-traumatic stress disorder, was admitted to the facility and later had a physician's order for an immediate (STAT) Kidney, Ureter, and Bladder (KUB) x-ray due to abdominal symptoms. Although nursing notes referenced the x-ray and its impression, the actual documentation of the x-ray results could not be located in the resident's medical record during the review period. Interviews with multiple staff members, including LPNs, the Regional Compliance Nurse, the DON, and the Administrator, revealed that the process for handling x-ray results involved receiving faxed reports from the x-ray company, notifying the physician, and distributing copies to various offices before forwarding the results to medical records for scanning and attachment to the resident's chart. However, there was a lack of clarity and consistency in the process, and the KUB x-ray result for the resident in question was not found in the clinical record as required.
Failure to Implement Proper Contact Precautions for Resident with MRSA
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency was identified when a resident with a history of MRSA septic arthritis, bacteremia, and a PICC line for intravenous antibiotics was not placed on proper contact precautions. The resident had undergone surgical cleaning of both ankles, with the left foot confirmed to have MRSA. Despite the presence of a PPE cart in the room and a magnet indicator on the doorframe, there was no signage specifying the type of transmission-based precautions required. The resident's medical records indicated orders for both Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) and Contact Precautions due to wounds and the PICC line, and the care plan included interventions for EBP related to these conditions. Interviews with staff revealed confusion and lack of clarity regarding the implementation and distinction between EBP and Contact Precautions. An LPN was unable to clearly differentiate between the two types of precautions or specify the required PPE for each. The Director of Rehabilitation was unaware that the resident was on any transmission-based precautions and allowed the resident to participate in therapy sessions in the gym, stating that if the wound was contained, gym attendance was permitted. The DON confirmed that a number 6 magnet was used to indicate EBP, but that Contact Precautions would require additional signage, which was not present for this resident. Facility policies and CDC guidance reviewed during the survey specified that residents with MRSA infections should be placed on Contact Precautions, with clear signage and appropriate use of gowns and gloves upon room entry. The lack of proper signage, inconsistent staff knowledge, and failure to implement the correct precautions for a resident with an active MRSA infection led to the deficiency. The resident was observed participating in group therapy without the required precautions in place, further demonstrating the facility's failure to maintain an effective infection prevention and control program.
Latest citations in Utah
Surveyors found that the facility did not ensure residents or their representatives were informed of and able to participate in decisions about psychotropic medications. Several residents with conditions such as dementia, early-onset Alzheimer’s disease, major depressive disorder, psychotic disorder, and Parkinson’s disease were started on drugs including haloperidol, donepezil, buspirone, quetiapine, zaleplon, and sertraline without documentation that risks, benefits, or alternative treatments were discussed in advance. The DON reported that staff notify families when medications are started or changed but do not review risks and benefits, offer alternative options, or obtain signed consent, resulting in no evidence of informed decision-making for these psychotropic treatments.
Surveyors determined that the facility failed to consistently manage psychotropic medications for three residents. Two residents with dementia and psychiatric conditions had only one documented psychotropic medication review and gradual dose reduction (GDR) attempt, completed in January, with no evidence of quarterly reviews or additional GDR efforts. Another resident with hemiplegia, psychotic disorder, dementia, and major depressive disorder had a PRN IM haloperidol order written without an end date, which remained active and was administered on multiple occasions beyond 14 days, and the DON confirmed there was no physician documentation justifying the extended PRN antipsychotic order.
The facility failed to ensure that alleged abuse and serious injuries were reported to the State Survey Agency as required, instead either reporting only to a state patient safety system or not reporting at all. One resident with severe cognitive impairment sustained bilateral femur fractures after a fall, another cognitively impaired resident with Parkinson’s disease was later found to have a femur fracture after being discovered on the floor, and a third cognitively impaired resident required ORIF surgery for fractures following a fall; none of these incidents were reported through the State Survey Agency’s incident reporting website, per the ADM. In addition, an allegation that a resident with dementia and sensory impairments may have been molested was documented in the abuse binder but not in the medical record, and the ADM did not report the allegation to agencies or law enforcement after deeming it not credible, despite interviewing the resident and family. These actions and omissions resulted in multiple unreported events that met criteria for immediate reporting of alleged abuse and injuries of unknown source.
The facility failed to investigate multiple major injuries and an allegation of sexual abuse involving three residents with severe cognitive impairment and significant medical conditions. One resident, dependent for transfers, was found on the floor after attempting to get out of bed and was later found to have bilateral femur fractures. Another resident with Parkinson’s disease was found on the floor after a wheelchair alarm sounded and was later diagnosed with a femur fracture following complaints of leg pain. A third resident, described as very independent, triggered a bed alarm and was found kneeling by a recliner, later requiring ORIF for fractures of the right 4th and 5th metacarpals. In each case, the ADM acknowledged awareness of the fractures, stated there was no belief of neglect or abuse, and confirmed that no investigation into the cause of the injuries or the alleged abuse was initiated or documented.
Surveyors found that the facility failed to ensure monthly pharmacist drug regimen reviews were completed and documented for several residents with conditions such as Parkinson’s disease, dementia, and Alzheimer’s disease, with no pharmacist notes present for at least two consecutive months. Additionally, a pharmacist’s recommendation to add a low-dose daytime antipsychotic for a resident with dementia, psychotic disorder, and behavioral symptoms was not communicated to the physician or implemented for several months, despite documented behavioral concerns. An LPN reported not relaying the pharmacist’s recommendation because PRN Haldol had not been needed at that time, and the DON confirmed that the pharmacist reviews for the missing months were not done and that she did not have time to monitor follow-through on such recommendations.
Surveyors identified a failure to properly label medications when two open insulin pens were found in a medication refrigerator bin marked only with a resident’s first name, with no labels directly on the pens. During an observation, an RN confirmed the pens belonged to a resident and acknowledged that pens are supposed to be labeled with the resident’s name but could not explain why these were not labeled. In a subsequent interview, the DON confirmed the pens had been unlabeled and stated they should have been labeled in accordance with professional standards.
The facility failed to sustain effective QAPI processes related to pharmacist medication regimen reviews, resulting in repeated noncompliance with F756. Surveyors found that medical records for four residents lacked documentation showing that a pharmacist had reviewed medications, identified potential irregularities, or made recommendations to attending physicians, an issue previously cited. The DON reported she did not have time to maintain this documentation, and the Administrator acknowledged there was no formal performance improvement project in place, though some plans were noted in QAPI minutes, and no supporting documents were produced to demonstrate ongoing compliance.
Staff failed to follow infection control practices during medication administration and did not maintain organized infection surveillance documentation. An LPN was observed handling an oral medication with bare hands before administering it to a resident, contrary to the DON’s stated expectation that pills be dispensed directly into medication cups without hand contact and that any contaminated dose be discarded. Additionally, the DON, who also served as the Infection Preventionist, reported that several residents had influenza during a past holiday season but had no list of affected residents or rooms, and the requested infection control surveillance logs and a formal tracking system were not available.
The facility lacked an antibiotic stewardship program, with no protocols to ensure appropriate indication, dose, and duration of antibiotic prescriptions and no system to monitor antibiotic use or resistance patterns. When surveyors requested Infection Control Surveillance Logs, including antibiotic tracking information, the logs were not available. In an interview, the DON, who also functioned as the Infection Preventionist, acknowledged that she did not track resident antibiotic utilization, clinical indications, or treatment durations.
A resident with multiple chronic conditions, including DM, HTN, anxiety, major depressive disorder, and PTSD, reported that a CNA on night shift failed to hold open a smoking-area door, leading the resident to grab the door and sustain a finger cut that bled. The resident completed a grievance with the RA, who documented that the CNA swung the door open and walked away and that no abuse or neglect allegation was initially identified. However, the grievance lacked documentation of investigative steps, a summary of findings, a conclusion on whether the grievance was confirmed, and any decision date or required signatures, and leadership later reported they had not been informed of the incident, demonstrating the grievance was not promptly resolved or fully tracked through conclusion.
Failure to Inform Residents of Risks, Benefits, and Alternatives Before Starting Psychotropic Medications
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to ensure that residents, or their representatives, were informed of and allowed to participate in decisions regarding psychotropic medication treatment, including being informed in advance of the risks, benefits, and treatment alternatives. For four sampled residents, medical record review showed new orders for multiple psychotropic medications without any documentation that the resident or representative had been informed of these elements prior to initiation. Resident 8, with diagnoses including hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction, psychotic disorder with delusions, dementia, and major depressive disorder, was started on haloperidol lactate, donepezil, buspirone, quetiapine, and sertraline on various dates, with no documentation of informed discussion or consent. Resident 4, with unspecified dementia and anxiety disorder, was started on zaleplon, quetiapine, and buspirone, again with no record that risks, benefits, or alternatives were discussed in advance. Resident 54, diagnosed with early-onset Alzheimer’s disease and dementia in other diseases classified elsewhere, was started on sertraline and quetiapine, and Resident 6, diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease without dyskinesia, was started on buspirone, quetiapine (Seroquel), and sertraline, with no documentation that either resident or their representative had been informed of the risks and benefits or treatment options before these psychotropic medications were initiated. During an interview, the DON stated that the facility notifies families when medications are started or doses are changed but does not discuss risks and benefits, provide alternative options, or obtain signed consent. This practice contributed to the lack of documented evidence that residents or their representatives were fully informed and able to participate in treatment decisions regarding psychotropic medications.
Failure to Perform Regular GDR and Limit PRN Antipsychotic Orders
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors found that the facility did not ensure appropriate management of psychotropic medications for three sampled residents. For two residents with dementia and related psychiatric diagnoses, the medical records from late April 2026 showed only one documented psychotropic medication review and gradual dose reduction (GDR) attempt, completed in January 2026. There was no documentation of any GDR attempts or psychotropic reviews prior to January 2026, despite the DON stating that such reviews and GDRs should be completed quarterly. The records for these residents did not contain additional GDR attempts beyond the January 2026 review. For a third resident with hemiplegia following cerebral infarction, psychotic disorder with delusions, dementia, and major depressive disorder, a physician’s order dated February 8, 2026, prescribed PRN intramuscular haloperidol lactate every 12 hours for delusions, hallucinations, paranoia, and agitation, without an end date. Review of the MARs for February through April 2026 showed that this PRN antipsychotic was administered on two occasions, and no end date was documented on the MAR. In an interview, the DON acknowledged that the PRN haloperidol order extended beyond 14 days and that the physician had not documented a reason for continuing the order beyond that period.
Failure to Report Alleged Abuse and Serious Injuries to State Survey Agency
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to ensure that all alleged violations of abuse, including injuries of unknown source and incidents involving major injuries, were reported immediately to the State Survey Agency and other officials as required by state law. For four sampled residents, the Administrator acknowledged that incidents were reported only to the state’s patient safety website and not to the State Survey Agency’s incident reporting website. This omission meant that the State Survey Agency did not receive timely notice of serious events, including an allegation of sexual abuse and multiple incidents resulting in significant fractures and surgery. For one resident with severely impaired cognition and diagnoses including hemiplegia and hemiparesis, nursing notes documented that the resident was found on the floor after attempting to get out of bed, was sent to the ER, and returned with immobilizing braces on both legs due to bilateral femur fractures. The resident’s bones were not strong enough for surgery, and he was placed on comfort care. Despite the seriousness of the injuries and the requirement to treat such events as potential abuse or neglect until ruled out, the Administrator stated that this incident was reported only to the state’s patient safety website and not to the State Survey Agency’s incident reporting system. Another resident with Parkinson’s disease and severely impaired cognition was found on the floor after a wheelchair alarm sounded, initially with no visible injury and able to bear weight. A few days later, staff documented complaints of left leg pain, tenderness, and wincing with movement, leading to an order for x‑rays and transfer for imaging. X‑ray results revealed a femur fracture, and surgery was not pursued. The Administrator reported this incident to the state’s patient safety website but not to the State Survey Agency’s incident reporting website. A third resident with severe cognitive impairment experienced a fall with complaints of pain in the left knee, left elbow, and fingers, and later underwent ORIF surgery for fractures of the right fourth and fifth metacarpals; this incident also was not reported to the State Survey Agency’s incident reporting system, according to the Administrator. For another resident with dementia, adjustment disorder with anxiety, hearing and visual loss, and age‑related debility, a document in the facility’s abuse binder described a possible molestation allegation originating from a phone call by the resident’s nephew. The nephew reported that his mother, the resident’s sister and then‑POA, was emotionally unstable and had stated she felt the resident had reported being molested. The Administrator documented that the nephew did not believe the allegation was credible, that the sister had dementia and emotional issues, and that the Administrator considered the report “not a viable allegation.” The Administrator noted that he interviewed the resident, who denied being touched, and that the sister could not provide more details beyond stating that a man had groped the resident’s breast. The Administrator concluded the allegation was not credible and did not report it to any agencies or law enforcement. The incident was not documented in the resident’s medical record, and the Administrator confirmed in interview that he did not report this sexual abuse allegation to the State Survey Agency’s incident reporting website. Across these four residents, the common deficiency was the facility’s failure to treat serious injuries and a sexual abuse allegation as reportable events to the State Survey Agency, as required. Instead, the Administrator limited reporting to the state’s patient safety website or chose not to report at all when he personally judged an allegation as not credible. This pattern of inaction regarding mandated reporting requirements formed the basis of the cited deficiency.
Failure to Investigate Major Injuries and Alleged Abuse
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to initiate and document investigations into multiple major injuries and an allegation of sexual abuse, as required for all alleged violations involving abuse and injuries of unknown source. For one resident with hemiplegia, hemiparesis, and severely impaired cognition (BIMS score of 6), nursing notes documented that his roommate activated the call bell after the resident fell while attempting to get out of bed by himself. He was found on the floor between his bed and the window, reported knee pain with a popping sensation, and was sent to the ER. On return from the hospital, he was noted to have bilateral femur fractures, immobilizing braces on both legs, and was placed on comfort care due to bones not being strong enough for surgery. The Administrator acknowledged awareness of the bilateral femur fractures, stated he did not believe neglect or abuse caused the injury, and confirmed he did not investigate the cause of this major injury. Another resident with Parkinson’s disease and a BIMS score of 0 (rarely/never understood) was documented in an incident note as sitting in a wheelchair in the dining room when his alarm sounded; he was found supine on the floor, denied hitting his head or injury, and was assisted back into the chair with no signs of injury noted. Several days later, nursing notes recorded that CNAs reported the resident complaining of left leg pain when getting him out of bed. On assessment, he had tenderness and wincing with movement of the left leg but was able to bear weight. The MD was notified, an x-ray was ordered, and the resident was transported for imaging, which revealed a femur fracture for which surgery was not pursued. The Administrator stated he was aware of the femur fracture, did not feel neglect or abuse caused the major injury, and did not investigate the cause of the injury. A third resident with COPD, scoliosis, and severely impaired cognition (BIMS score of 7) had an incident note documenting that her bed alarm sounded and staff found her in a kneeling position leaning into her recliner after she attempted to get up from bed to go to the bathroom, stating her walker “didn't go where she was going.” She complained of left knee, left elbow, and right pinky pain, with no visible injury except an abrasion on the right ring finger. A later nursing note documented that she underwent ORIF of fractures of the right fourth and fifth metacarpals at a hospital and returned from surgery the same day. The Administrator reported being aware of the fractures, described the resident as very independent and wanting to wander the facility, stated he did not feel neglect or abuse caused the major injury, and confirmed he did not investigate the cause of the injury. Across these three residents, the facility did not initiate or document investigations into the causes of the major injuries or the related allegation of sexual abuse, nor did it determine causation or responsible parties as required.
Failure to Complete Monthly Pharmacist Reviews and Timely Act on Medication Recommendations
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to ensure that a licensed pharmacist conducted and documented monthly drug regimen reviews for multiple residents and to ensure that identified medication irregularities were acted upon by the attending physician. For four sampled residents, the medical records lacked monthly pharmacist medication regimen review notes for at least two consecutive months. Specifically, residents with diagnoses including Parkinson’s disease, unspecified dementia, Alzheimer’s disease with early onset, and dementia related to other diseases had no documented pharmacist review notes for March and April 2026. The DON confirmed that the pharmacist had not completed pharmacy reviews for those months and that the notes, which should have been uploaded into each resident’s electronic medical record, were absent. In addition, the facility failed to act promptly on a pharmacist’s recommendation for a resident receiving psychotropic medications. One resident with hemiplegia following cerebral infarction, psychotic disorder with delusions, dementia, and major depressive disorder had a pharmacist recommendation in November 2025 to add a low-dose daytime Seroquel due to behavioral issues and afternoon anxiety. Nursing documentation showed that the pharmacist discussed the resident’s response to Seroquel versus Abilify and suggested a low-dose daytime Seroquel, but this recommendation was not communicated to the physician at that time. The LPN later stated she did not speak to the physician about the pharmacist’s recommendation because the resident had not needed PRN Haldol around that time. The physician did not write the order for daytime Seroquel until early February 2026, after a nurse raised concerns about the resident’s behaviors and reminded the physician of the prior pharmacist recommendation. The DON acknowledged that the pharmacist’s November 2025 recommendation was not completed until February 2026 and stated she did not have time to stay on top of such issues.
Unlabeled Insulin Pens Found in Medication Refrigerator
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that drugs and biologicals were labeled in accordance with accepted professional principles when two open insulin pens belonging to resident 56 were found without the resident’s name on them. During an observation of the south medication refrigerator on 4/29/26 at 10:50 AM, surveyors noted a plastic bin labeled only with resident 56’s first name, containing two loose, open insulin pens that had no resident identification labels affixed directly to the pens. In a concurrent interview, RN 1 confirmed that the two insulin pens belonged to resident 56 and stated that staff always put residents’ names on insulin pens, but was unsure why these pens had not been labeled. Later that day at 2:17 PM, the DON stated in an interview that the two insulin pens in question had been unlabeled and acknowledged that the insulin pens should have been labeled with the resident’s information.
Failure to Sustain QAPI Actions and Documentation for Pharmacist Medication Reviews
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure, as part of its performance improvement activities, to take actions aimed at performance improvement, measure the success of those actions, and track performance to ensure that improvements were realized and sustained, specifically related to F756. Record review and interviews showed that the facility did not maintain documentation in the medical records to demonstrate that a pharmacist reviewed residents’ medications, identified potential irregularities, or provided recommendations to the attending physician for four sampled residents, despite this same issue having been cited in the previous health survey in 2024. During an interview, the DON stated she did not have time to maintain this required documentation. In a separate interview, the Administrator stated he did not have a performance improvement project, though he had QAPI minutes that captured some improvement plans, and he believed the facility had achieved compliance with F756, which had been cited previously, but no documents demonstrating compliance were provided when requested by surveyors.
Failure in Medication Handling and Infection Surveillance Documentation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure a safe and sanitary environment during medication administration and infection surveillance. During an observation of medication pass for resident 23, an LPN was seen popping an oral pill directly from a blister pack into her bare hand and then placing it into a medication cup, after which the medication was administered to the resident. In a subsequent interview, the DON stated that staff were expected to pop pills directly into medication cups and never touch medications with bare hands, and that any medication contacting a staff member’s bare hand was to be discarded and replaced, indicating that the observed practice did not follow facility expectations. The facility also failed to maintain infection control surveillance documentation and an organized tracking system for infections. When Infection Control Surveillance Logs were requested, the DON reported that several residents had contracted influenza during the 2025 holiday season, attributed to an increased number of visitors, and that symptomatic residents were kept in their rooms. However, the DON stated she did not have a list of affected residents or rooms, and the requested surveillance logs were unavailable for review. In a later interview, the DON, who also served as the facility’s Infection Preventionist, confirmed that the facility lacked an infection control surveillance manual or organized system for tracking infections.
Failure to Implement and Monitor an Antibiotic Stewardship Program
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop and implement an antibiotic stewardship program that included antibiotic use protocols and a system to monitor antibiotic use. There was no established facility-wide system to ensure appropriate indication, dose, and duration for antibiotic prescriptions, and no process for monitoring antibiotic usage or resistance data. On 4/29/26 at 8:20 AM, when surveyors requested the facility’s Infection Control Surveillance Logs, including any prescribed antibiotic tracking information, these logs were unavailable. On 4/30/26 at 12:28 PM, during an interview, the DON, who also served as the facility’s designated Infection Preventionist, stated that she did not track resident antibiotic utilization, including the specific clinical indications for the medications or the prescribed durations of treatment. No specific residents, their medical histories, or clinical conditions at the time of the deficiency were described in the report.
Failure to Promptly Resolve and Document Resident Grievance Regarding Door Injury
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to promptly resolve and properly document a resident grievance in accordance with its grievance policy. A resident with type II DM, HTN, anxiety disorder, major depressive disorder, and PTSD reported that a CNA on night shift did not hold open the smoking door for her and another resident, and that when she went to grab the door, it slammed on or closed against her finger, causing a cut to bleed. The resident stated she reported this to the Resident Advocate (RA) and completed a grievance form, and that nursing staff applied Neosporin and a bandage to the finger. The resident did not know the CNA’s name but identified that the CNA worked nights and stated that no one should be treating residents that way. The grievance form dated 4/10/26 documented the concern that the CNA on night shift did not hold the smoking door open and instead swung the door open and walked away, and that upon initial interview no allegation of abuse or neglect was identified. However, the grievance form contained no documentation of investigative steps taken, no summary of findings or conclusion, and no indication whether the grievance was confirmed or not. The form also lacked a written decision date, resident signature, grievance officer signature, and Administrator signature. The RA reported that the resident told her the door incident caused a small cut to reopen and that the CNA seemed in a hurry, but did not state that the CNA acted intentionally or purposefully toward her. The Administrator and DON later stated they had not been informed of the incident, and the Regional Nurse Consultant noted that nothing was filled out on the back of the grievance form, indicating it remained incomplete despite having been initiated several days earlier.
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.
