15
Inspections
15
Deficiencies
1
Actual Harm or Above
21
Occurrences
May 21, 2026
Last Inspection
S/S D/E/F Potential for harmS/S G Actual harm
The most recent inspection of CENTRE AVENUE HEALTH AND REHAB LLC on record is dated May 21, 2026. Across 15 published inspections, state surveyors cited 15 deficiencies, 1 of which reached actual harm or immediate jeopardy.
Colorado publishes inspections on a rolling window, so older surveys may no longer appear. Citation codes 0000 and 9999 are the surveyor's opening and closing comments, not deficiencies, and are excluded from the counts above. Where the state required one, the facility's own plan of correction is shown beneath the finding it answers.
Provider Information
Status
Active
Facility Type
SNF/NF Dual Certification
Administrator
Dale, Clinton C.
Owner
CENTRE AVENUE HEALTH AND REHAB LLC
Phone
(970) 494-2140
Payor Source
Medicare, Medicaid, Private Pay
City
FORT COLLINS
ZIP
80526-1844
Inspections & Citations
15 inspections · 15 deficiencies5/21/2026Complaint Survey · ID 232DF3-H11 deficiency▼
0000INITIAL COMMENTSSurveyor note▼
Findings
A complaint survey, prompted by #CO 2793925, #CO 2998974, Incident #2641250, Incident #3019425, Incident #3019489 and Incident #3019596 was completed on 5/20/26 to 5/21/26. One deficiency was cited.
Plan of correction
The state did not require a plan of correction for this citation.
0760Residents are Free of Significant Med Errors▼
Findings
Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure two (#1 and #20) of six residents out of 20 sample residents were free from significant medication errors. Specifically, the facility failed to:-Prevent Resident #20 from a missed administration of a rapid-acting insulin dose; and,-Prevent Resident #1 from receiving the wrong dose of a long-acting insulin. Findings include:Record review and interviews confirmed the facility corrected the deficient practice prior to the onsite investigation on 5/20/26 to 5/21/26, resulting in the deficiency being cited as past noncompliance with a correction date of 4/27/26. I. Incidents of insulin administration failures for Resident #20 and Resident #1On 4/8/26 at 7:00 a.m. registered nurse (RN) #2 failed to check Resident #20's blood sugar before breakfast and did not administer three units of insulin aspart (a rapid acting insulin with a duration lasting three to five hours), as ordered by the physician. Due to RN #2’s failure to monitor and administer the physician ordered insulin, Resident #20's blood glucose level (measure of the amount of sugar present in the blood) increased to 600 milligrams per deciliter (mg/dl) later that afternoon (4/8/26). On 4/24/26 at 7:40 p.m. RN #1 obtained Resident #1's blood sugar, which was 127 mg/dl, and administered the resident’s scheduled dose of three units of insulin glargine (a long lasting insulin with a duration of 24 hours). However, RN #1 inadvertently administered 30 units of insulin glargine instead of the physician ordered dose of three units. Due to RN #1’s failure to ensure the correct dose of insulin was administered to Resident #1, the resident’s blood glucose level decreased to 60 mg/dl and the resident experienced lethargy and difficulty staying awake. II. Facility plan of correctionThe corrective action plan the facility implemented in response to the incidents of the missed insulin administration for Resident #20 on 4/8/26, and the administration of the wrong dose of insulin for Resident #1 on 4/24/26 was provided by the chief nursing officer on 5/21/26 at 10:37 a.m. The corrective action plan documented the following: A. Immediate action for affected residents included the following:RN #2 notified the provider Resident #20’s missed administration of the resident’s morning insulin dose on 4/8/26. RN #2 was educated on 4/9/26 to prioritize diabetic medications in the morning and to ask for assistance if running behind on work. On 4/24/26 the facility notified the provider, the resident’s representative and the director of nursing (DON) regarding Resident #1 receiving the wrong dose of insulin on 4/24/26. Resident #1 was notified of the medication error on 4/24/26 and was educated on signs and symptoms of low blood sugar and the use of glucagon (an emergency treatment for low blood sugar). Resident #1 was given orange juice, peanut butter, crackers and candy in response to the incorrect insulin administration. Resident #1 was placed on alert charting highlighting blood glucose checks every three hours initially and then increased to every one hour blood glucose checks. Education in response to the insulin medication error was provided to RN #1 by the DON on 4/24/26. RN #1 was observed during insulin administration on 4/25/26 to ensure she followed safe practices. Education was provided to charge nurses on 4/25/26 which included reviewing insulin orders in detail prior to administration. The medical director was notified on 4/25/26 by the on-call nurse practitioner of the insulin overdose administered to Resident #1 (on 4/24/26). B. Identification of other residents having the potential to be affected by the deficient practiceThe facility documented 11 additional residents that required insulin for treatment of diabetes mellitus. C. Measures or systemic changes to ensure the deficient practice will not recurThe facility documented the completion of a house wide audit on 4/25/26, which included a review of all current residents’ insulin orders to determine if insulin had been correctly administered. The facility documented nursing staff education was completed on 4/25/26. The education included the rights of medication administration and a review of critical medications and documentation of online training titled “The Dangers of Medication Administration.” The nursing staff education additionally included the implementation of the use of a second nurse for verification of insulin orders during medication administration. The facility documented completion of insulin administration audits and competencies on 4/25/26 for nursing staff who were at the facility at the time and who routinely administered insulin. The facility plan included audits of insulin orders, insulin administration documentation and second nurse verification of insulin administration documentation daily for twelve weeks. The facility documented an ad hoc (spontaneous discussion scheduled to address an unexpected concern) quality assurance and performance improvement (QAPI) meeting on 4/27/26 with the medical director (MD), the nursing home administrator (NHA), the DON, the social services director (SSD) and the clinical manager determined the necessary re-education of all nursing staff which included: -Education about critical medication and insulin dosing before administration and the10 Rights of Medication Administration; -The addition of supplemental documentation which included second nurse verification; -Staff education (Rights of Medication Administration, critical medications), and through the online education (The Dangers of Medication Administration); and,-Insulin administration audits and competencies were initiated for nursing staff who routinely administered insulin. D. Plan to monitor for sustained complianceThe facility documented nursing leadership would be auditing residents’ insulin orders and administration documentation and second nurse verification of insulin administration daily for 12 weeks. Nurses would be observed administering insulin by the DON or the pharmacist or designee. The facility documented the initiation of a QAPI Performance Improvement Project (PIP) on 4/27/26 for monitoring corrective action and the facility’s plan was to review findings at the monthly QAPI meeting for a minimum of three months. The facility documented adjustments would be made to the plan to ensure sustained compliance. E. The facility documented the date of compliance was 4/27/26. III. Facility policy and procedure The Medication Administration policy, revised 5/6/26, was provided by the chief nursing officer on 5/21/26 at 4:59 p.m. It read in pertinent part,“Ensure that the six rights of medication administration are followed: right resident, right drug, right dosage, right route, right time, and right documentation.“Review medication administration records (MAR) to identify medication to be administered. The Medication Errors policy, implemented 4/11/26, was provided by the chief nursing officer on 5/12/26 at 4:59 p.m. It read in pertinent part, “It is the policy of this facility to provide protections for the health, welfare, and rights of each resident by ensuring residents receive care and services safely in an environment free of significant medication errors. “The facility will ensure medications will be administered according to physician orders.“Significant medication error means one which causes the resident discomfort or jeopardizes his/her health and safety.” IV. Resident #20 A. Resident statusResident #20, age 89, was admitted on 10/30/25. According to the May 2026 computerized physician orders (CPO), diagnoses included diabetes mellitus, long term use of insulin, glaucoma, scoliosis and chronic lower back pain. The 4/30/26 minimum data set (MDS) assessment identified Resident #20 was cognitively intact with a brief interview for mental status (BIMS) score of 15 out of 15. The MDS assessment revealed the resident used a wheelchair, and required assistance with transfers, bathing, dressing and her vision was highly impaired. The MDS assessment indicated the resident received insulin injections. B. Resident interviewResident #20 was interviewed on 5/21/26 at 2:00 p.m. Resident #20 said she had diabetes for many years and always wanted to know her blood glucose levels and insulin dosages so she could keep track of her diabetes. She said she sometimes had felt symptoms of high or low blood sugars and she would let the nurses know when she had felt symptoms. C. Record reviewThe diabetes care plan, initiated 11/24/25, revealed Resident #20’s potential for complications, including hypoglycemia (low blood sugar) and hyperglycemia (high blood sugar) related to diabetes mellitus. Interventions included administering medications and blood sugar checks as ordered and as needed. A review of Resident #20’s April 2026 CPO revealed revealed the following physician’s orders: Blood glucose monitoring before meals and at bedtime related to type 1 diabetes. Call the provider if blood glucose is less than 70 mg/dl or greater than 400 mg/dl, ordered on 11/19/25. Inject three units of insulin aspart subcutaneously (under the skin) one time a day before breakfast for type 1 diabetes mellitus, ordered on 3/22/26. Review of Resident #20’s April 2026 MAR revealed no blood glucose level was recorded and no insulin aspart was documented as being administered to the resident on 4/8/26 at 7:00 a.m. On 4/8/26 at 1:38 p.m. the April 2026 MAR revealed Resident #20's blood glucose level was 191.0 mg/dl. On 4/8/26 at 3:28 p.m. the April 2026 MAR revealed Resident #20's blood glucose level had increased to 600 mg/dl. A nursing progress note, dated 4/8/26 at 3:28 p.m. revealed the physician was notified about Resident #20’s elevated blood glucose level. The note documented the physician ordered monitoring of Resident #20 for signs and symptoms of high blood glucose and checking Resident #20’s blood glucose one hour later. The note documented a new physician’s order to inject insulin aspart subcutaneously before meals per a sliding insulin scale in addition to the scheduled insulin aspart dose. On 4/8/26 at 6:27 p.m. the April 2026 MAR revealed Resident #20's blood glucose level was 352 mg/dl. On 4/9/26 at 7:14 a.m. the April 2026 MAR revealed Resident #20's blood glucose level was 162 mg/dl. A medication/treatment error incident investigation, signed by RN #2 on 4/9/24, documented RN #2 did not check Resident #20's blood sugar before breakfast and did not administer insulin aspart three units as ordered by the physician. D. Staff interviewRN #2 was interviewed on 5/21/26 at 2:14 p.m. RN #2 said she usually worked on the first floor of the facility, but on 4/8/26 she was scheduled to work on the second floor where Resident #20's room was located. RN #2 said on 4/8/26 she worked the 6:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. shift and there were a lot of residents to check for blood glucose levels on that morning. RN #2 said she got behind that morning and did not catch up in time for checking Resident #20's blood glucose level and administering the resident’s morning insulin dose. RN #2 said she reported the missed blood glucose level check and missed morning insulin aspart dose to the DON on 4/8/26 at approximately 2:00 p.m. RN #2 said she additionally reported the missed administration to the oncoming nurse at the change of shift. RN #2 said she should have recognized earlier that she was getting behind with her medication administration and she should have notified the charge nurse at that time so Resident #20 would receive her scheduled insulin. V. Resident #1A. Resident Status Resident #1, age 66, was admitted on 4/21/26 and discharged to home on 5/11/26. According to the May 2026 CPO, diagnoses included diabetes, right sided weakness as result of a previous stroke and right hip and right knee pain after a recent fall at home. The 4/24/26 MDS assessment identified Resident #1 was cognitively intact with a BIMS score of 13 out of 15. The MDS assessment revealed the resident was dependent for assistance with sitting to standing and transfers, and required substantial assistance with bathing, toileting, and lower body dressing. The MDS assessment indicated the resident received insulin injections. B. Record Review The diabetes care plan, initiated 4/21/26, revealed Resident #1 had a diagnosis of diabetes mellitus. Interventions included administering medications as ordered and monitoring for signs and symptoms of high blood sugar and low blood sugar. A review of Resident #1’s April 2026 CPO revealed the following physician’s order:Inject three units of insulin glargine subcutaneously one time a day for type 2 diabetes, ordered 4/21/26. Review of Resident #1’s April 2026 MAR revealed RN #1 documented the administration of three units of insulin glargine to Resident #1 on 4/24/26 at 7:46 p.m. An on-call nurse practitioner’s progress note, dated 4/24/26 at 9:11 p.m. revealed the nurse practitioner was notified about a medication error for Resident #1. The note documented Resident #1 had received 30 units of Lantus (insulin glargine) and the correct dose for administration was three units. The note documented the nurse practitioner was concerned for low blood sugars and blood glucose checks were ordered for 12:00 a.m., 3:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m. A nursing progress note, dated 4/24/26 at 10:14 p.m., revealed Resident #1’s blood sugar level at 7:40 p.m. was 127 mg/dl. After obtaining the resident’s blood sugar, RN #1 later returned to the resident’s room to administer the resident’s insulin. After administering the resident’s insulin, RN #1 returned to her medication cart to chart the insulin administration and realized the amount of insulin she administered was incorrect (RN #1 administered 30 units of glargine insulin instead of 3 units of insulin - see RN #1 interview below) RN #1 returned to Resident #1, explained the insulin overdose to Resident #1, provided orange juice to the resident and directed Resident #1 to call if he experienced signs or symptoms of low blood sugar. RN #1 continued to monitor Resident #1 and the resident’s representative and the on-call nurse practitioner were notified. A nursing progress note, dated 4/25/26 at 2:50 a.m. revealed Resident #1's blood glucose level was 60 mg/dl on 4/24/26 at 11:30 p.m. and glucose and orange juice were provided to Resident #1. Resident #1's blood glucose level recheck 15 minutes later (11:45 p.m.) was 90 mg/dl. The note documented Resident #1 was lethargic and had a difficult time staying awake. The note documented the on-call nurse practitioner was notified again and ordered continued monitoring of Resident #1’s blood glucose levels. Resident #1’s blood glucose level at 2:30 a.m was 111 mg/dl and Resident #1 was provided protein snacks. A nursing progress note, dated 4/25/26 at 6:40 a.m., revealed Resident #1 was alert in bed and his blood glucose level was 60 mg/dl. The resident was given yogurt and 240 ml (milliliter) of orange juice with four sugars added. A nursing progress note, dated 4/25/26 at 7:00 a.m. revealed Resident #1 was alert and was transferred to the toilet and had a large loose bowel movement. The note documented Resident #1's blood glucose level was 65 mg/dl and an Ensure shake was administered to the resident. A nursing progress note, dated 4/25/26 at 7:24 a.m., revealed Resident #1 was awake and alert and his blood glucose level was 88 mg/dl. The resident’s vital signs were stable. A call was placed to the DON to inform him of the medication error. A nursing progress note, dated 4/25/26 at 8:00 a.m., revealed Resident #1 was eating breakfast and his blood glucose level was 86 mg/dl. The RN charge nurse was made aware of the situation and the provider was notified with instructions to continue frequent monitoring of the resident. A nursing progress note, dated 4/25/26 at 10:32 a.m., revealed Resident #1 was checked on every 15 to 20 minutes and the resident's blood glucose levels were checked every 30 to 60 minutes. The note documented Resident #1's regular nurse practitioner was notified and a physician’s order was received for monitoring blood glucose levels every hour, calling the nurse practitioner at 1:00 p.m for an update, and also to call the nurse practitioner and send the resident to the emergency room if Resident #1 was symptomatic. The resident’s representative was called to update her on the resident’s status. A nursing progress note, dated 4/25/26 at 11:06 a.m., revealed Resident #1's blood glucose level was 66 mg/dl and peanut butter and crackers were provided to the resident. A nursing progress note, dated 4/25/26 at 1:37 p.m, revealed Resident #1's blood glucose level at 1:00 p.m was 95 mg/dl. The note documented Resident #1's nurse practitioner was notified and orders were received to continue checking the resident’s blood glucose levels every hour and place a call back to the nurse practitioner with a report of the resident’s status at 5:00 p.m. A nursing progress note, dated 4/25/26 at 4:13 p.m., revealed Resident #1's blood glucose level was 70 mg/dl and glucose tabs were administered to the resident. A nursing progress note, dated 4/25/26 at 5:17 p.m., revealed Resident #1's blood glucose level was 75 mg/dl and the resident’s dinner was being served. A nursing progress note, dated 4/25/26 at 5:18 p.m., revealed Resident #1 had multiple stools due to all of the food and juice. The note documented Resident #1 said he was not happy that he had been in bed most of the day because his blood glucose levels were not stable enough for him to get up. The resident verbalized understanding that it was for his safety. A nursing progress note, dated 4/25/26 at 5:25 p.m., revealed Resident #1's nurse practitioner was notified and orders were received for continuing the resident’s blood glucose level checks every hour until 9:00 p.m., at which time the nurse practitioner was to be called with an update of resident status. The note documented Resident #1’s insulin was to be held until 4/27/26. A nursing progress note, dated 4/25/26 at 6:01 p.m., revealed Resident #1's blood glucose level was 146 mg/dl and he was tired but alert. A nursing progress note, dated 4/25/26 at 11:29 p.m., revealed Resident #1's blood glucose level was stable, he had eaten a nutritious snack prior to going to sleep and he was resting comfortably in bed. The resident’s blood glucose levels would continue to be monitored throughout the night. The facility’s medication error report, dated 4/24/26, revealed RN #1 called Resident #1's representative on 4/24/26 at 9:08 p.m. and she notified the on-call nurse practitioner on 4/24/26 at 9:11 p.m. C. Frequent visitor interview A frequent visitor to the facility was interviewed on 5/20/26 at 10:43 a.m. The frequent visitor said she met with Resident #1 on 5/1/26. The frequent visitor said Resident #1 told her he felt awful the night of the insulin overdose and that staff kept waking him up, but he did not feel unsafe at the facility. The frequent visitor said the facility’s prevention plan was to re-educate RN #1 and the facility had a plan to re-educate all nursing staff. D. Staff interviewsRN #1 was interviewed on 5/21/26 at 10:04 a.m. RN #1 said she did not usually work on the floor where Resident #1 resided. She said 4/24/26 was the first time she administered insulin to Resident #1. RN #1 said on 4/24/26 at 7:55 p.m. she looked at the physician’s order for Resident #1 and dialed in 30 units on the Semglee (insulin glargine) insulin pen. RN #1 said she administered the 30 units of Semglee insulin with the insulin pen to Resident #1 on 4/24/26 at 7:55 p.m. RN #1 said when she went back to document the insulin dose, she realized the physician’s order was for 3 units of Semglee insulin and not the 30 units of Semglee insulin she had administered. RN #1 said she immediately got orange juice and candy for Resident #1, told the resident what had happened and stayed with Resident #1 for 15 minutes. RN #1 said shechecked the resident’s blood glucose level and the resident said he was feeling okay. RN #1 said she contacted the nurse practitioner on call who gave orders to monitor Resident #1' s blood glucose levels and treat the resident for low blood glucose. RN #1 said she called the DON to inform him of the situation. RN #1 said she spoke with Resident #1’s representative 30 minutes later, after Resident #1 had texted the representative about the insulin overdose. RN #1 said the resident’s representative was upset and RN #1 said she understood this was upsetting to the family. RN #1 said she checked Resident #1's blood glucose level and gave him peanut butter and crackers before she left the facility at the end of her shift. RN #1 said Resident #1 was doing okay when she left. Certified nurse aide (CNA) #1 was interviewed on 5/21/26 at 11:14 a.m. CNA #1 said she worked the evening shift on 4/24/26 when the insulin overdose administration occurred with Resident #1. She said she was told by RN #1 that Resident #1 needed to be monitored for symptoms of low blood sugar every five minutes. CNA #1 said she observed Resident #1 for symptoms of a change in alertness during the evening. CNA #1 said Resident #1 did not report symptoms of low blood sugar to RN #1. VI. Additional staff interviews The DON was interviewed on 5/21/26 at 5:45 p.m. The DON said he became aware of Resident #20's missed insulin dose through a record review, as he was not the DON at the time of the incident. The DON said RN #2 should have recognized that she was getting behind on her medication administration and notified the charge nurse immediately, at the time Resident #20's insulin was not administered on time according to the physician’s orders. The DON said RN #1 notified him of Resident #1's insulin overdose on 4/24/26 at about 9:00 p.m., after she had notified the on-call nurse practitioner and Resident #1's representative. The DON said RN #1 should have contacted him right away for a significant insulin medication administration error, where the physician’s order was not followed and ten times the insulin dose was administered to the resident. The DON said the nursing staff provided updates on the resident’s status to him during the night and the next day. He said Resident #1 was tired during the next day and returned to baseline later the following day (on 4/25/26). The DON said an insulin overdose of ten times the dose ordered could have caused hospitalization, organ failure and adverse outcomes. Resident #1's primary care physician was interviewed on 5/21/26 at 2:58 p.m. The primary care physician said he was in the facility on 4/9/26 and spoke to Resident #20 about her intake of candy during lunchtime on 4/8/26. PCP #1 said he monitored Resident #20’s condition after the missed insulin dose and said Resident #20's diabetes was difficult to control. The primary care physician said he was notified the next day about the incident with Resident #1 by the on-call provider service. The primary care physician said it was within the possibility that there could likely be harm when someone received ten times the dose of 30 units of insulin when someone was used to receiving only three units of insulin. The primary care physician said prevention for recurrence of this type of incident included staff education and this was primarily the responsibility of the medical director (MD). The MD was interviewed on 5/21/26 at 03:35 p.m. The MD said she was notified of Resident #20's missed insulin dose and blood glucose check. She said Resident #20's diabetes was difficult to control. The MD said she was notified of Resident #1's insulin overdose on 4/25/26 by the nurse practitioner on call and she was aware of Resident #1's status through 4/27/26, when she checked in with Resident #1. The MD said she routinely reviewed the facility’s medication errors and assisted in providing staff education. The MD said she participated in the 4/27/26 QAPI meeting to review Resident #1’s insulin medication error and the facility’s corrective action plan.
Plan of correction
The state did not require a plan of correction for this citation.
5/21/2026Licensure Complaint Survey · ID 232DF6-H1No deficiencies▼
0000Initial CommentsSurveyor note▼
Findings
A survey with #CO 2793927 was completed on 5/20/26 to 5/21/26. No deficiencies were cited.
Plan of correction
The state did not require a plan of correction for this citation.
9/3/2025Complaint Survey · ID 1D5AB1-H1No deficiencies▼
0000INITIAL COMMENTSSurveyor note▼
Findings
A complaint survey, prompted by #CO2603280 and Incident #2602908 was completed on 9/2/25 and 9/3/25. No deficiencies were cited.
Plan of correction
The state did not require a plan of correction for this citation.
6/5/2025Complaint Survey · ID 3BO211No deficiencies▼
0000INITIAL COMMENTSSurveyor note▼
Findings
A complaint survey, prompted by #CO39833, #CO40165 and Incident #39994 was conducted on 6/4/25 to 6/5/25. No deficiencies were cited.
Plan of correction
The state did not require a plan of correction for this citation.
2/12/2025Revisit: Recertification Survey · ID 895W22No deficiencies▼
0000INITIAL COMMENTSSurveyor note▼
Findings
A document revisit was completed with all deficiencies being corrected with the exception of any waived deficiency or deficiencies. All waived deficiencies will be corrected at a later date as per the approved waiver. A plan of correction is not required.
Plan of correction
The state did not require a plan of correction for this citation.
12/5/2024Complaint Survey · ID TH6711No deficiencies▼
0000INITIAL COMMENTSSurveyor note▼
Findings
A survey prompted by #CO38175 was conducted on 12/4/24 to 12/5/24. No deficiencies were cited.
Plan of correction
The state did not require a plan of correction for this citation.
10/29/2024Recertification Survey · ID 895W217 deficiencies▼
0000INITIAL COMMENTSSurveyor note▼
Findings
INITIAL COMMENTS (ID Prefix Tag #K000) are informational only and a representation of the facility's general characteristics. This survey was conducted in accordance with the Federal Register at Section 42 CFR 483.70(a). The facility is a two-story, Type II (111) construction. The facility is protected throughout by a National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 13 automatic fire suppression system and is classified as Fully Sprinkled. The facility was constructed in 2000 and is licensed for 90 beds. This re-certification survey, conducted on October 29th, 2024, was conducted to comply with the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA 101) Life Safety Code (2012) "Chapter 19, Existing Health Care Occupancies". The deficiencies cited were discussed with the Administrator and Maintenance Director during the exit conference conducted at the end of the on-site survey. The Administrator reported the daily census to be 76 residents on October 29th, 2024.
Plan of correction
The state did not require a plan of correction for this citation.
0211Means of Egress - GeneralS/S F▼
Findings
Based on observation and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to arrange and maintain the means of egress in accordance with Life Safety Code Section 19.2 and Chapter 7. 1. Propane being stored in the path of egress from therapy needs to be removed. 2. Storage in the stairwell near the kitchen needs to be removed. NFPA 101, 7.1.10.1* General. Means of egress shall be continuously maintained free of all obstructions or impediments to full instant use in the case of fire or other emergency. NFPA 101, 19.2.1 General. Every aisle, passageway, corridor, exit discharge, exit location, and access shall be in accordance with Chapter 7This deficiency has the potential to affect occupants, who might include residents, staff, and visitors throughout the facility. The administrator and maintenance director discussed deficient items at the exit conference.
Plan of correction · submitted by the facility
Corrective ActionThe facility removed the propane tanks and cleared the kitchen stairwell of itemsProcedureThe procedure for implementing the corrective action is to perform an inspection of all means of egress to ensure they are continuously maintained free of all obstructions or impediments. MonitoringThe monitoring of the procedure will be completed monthly by the Maintenance Director for three months. The maintenance Director or designee will perform the inspections and keep a written record of each. The monthly monitoring of the corridors will be reported by the Administrator to the Quality Assurance and Assessment meeting following the implementation of the POC and for three months following. TitleThe Maintenance Director is responsible for the implementation of the Plan of CorrectionDate10/30/24
0321Hazardous Areas - EnclosureS/S E▼
Findings
Based on observation and staff interview during the course of the survey it was determined the facility failed to maintain hazard areas in accordance with NFPA 101 1. Combustible storage is in the elevator room, containing boxes containing COVID tests and the building plans. 2. Basement storage needs fire stopping is needed for sprinkler pipe 3. The activity storage room has ceiling penetrations 7.14.6.2* Elevator machine rooms associated with occupant evacuation elevators shall be used for no purpose other than elevator machine rooms. 10.19.5.1 Combustible material shall not be stored in boiler rooms, mechanical rooms, or electrical equipment rooms. NFPA 101, 8.3.1.2 Fire barriers shall comply with one of the following:(1) The fire barriers are continuous from outside wall to outside wall or from one fire barrier to another, or a combination thereof, including continuity through all concealed spaces, such as those found above a ceiling, including interstitial spaces.(2) The fire barriers are continuous from outside wall to outside wall or from one fire barrier to another, and from the floor to the bottom of the interstitial space, provided that the construction assembly forming the bottom of the interstitial space has a fire resistance rating not less than that of the fire barrier. 8.3.2.3 Interior walls and partitions of nonsymmetrical construction shall be evaluated from both directions and assigned a fire resistance rating based on the shorter duration obtained in accordance with ASTM E 119, Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, or ANSI/UL 263, Standard for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials. When the wall is tested with the least fire-resistive side exposed to the furnace, the wall shall not be required to be subjected to tests from the opposite side. 8.3.1.3 Walls used as fire barriers shall comply with Chapter 7 of NFPA 221, Standard for High Challenge Fire Walls, Fire Walls, and Fire Barrier Walls. The NFPA 221 limitation on percentage width of openings shall not apply. This deficiency has the potential to affect occupants, who might include residents, staff, and visitors throughout the facility. The maintenance Director discussed deficient items at the exit conference.
Plan of correction · submitted by the facility
Corrective ActionThe facility removed the items from elevator room, administered fire stopping in basement storage for sprinkler pipe and in the activity storage room ceiling penetration. ProcedureThe procedure for implementing the corrective action is to perform an inspection of the elevator room and fire barriers to ensure compliance. MonitoringThe monitoring of the procedure will be completed monthly by the Maintenance Director for three months. The maintenance Director or designee will perform the inspections and keep a written record of each. The monthly monitoring of the corridors will be reported by the Administrator to the Quality Assurance and Assessment meeting following the implementation of the POC and for three months following. TitleThe Maintenance Director is responsible for the implementation of the Plan of CorrectionDate10/30/24
0324Cooking FacilitiesS/S E▼
Findings
Based on observation it was determined that the facility failed to maintain the kitchen hood suppression system as required by NFPA 96, (Chapter 12, Section 12.1.2.3.1) and cooking appliance restraint as required by NFPA 54, 9.6.1.2. 1. Only half of the cooking appliances have wheel chaulks, or means for the cooking appliances to return to proper locations underneath Hood Suppression System. NFPA 96 (2011) Section 12.1.2.3.1: An approved method shall be provided that will ensure that the appliance is returned to an approved design location. NFPA 54 -2012 Fuel and Gas Code 9.6.1.2 Restraints. Movement of appliances with casters shall be limited by a restraining device installed in accordance with the connector and appliance manufacturer installation instructions. This deficiency has the potential to affect occupants, who might include residents, staff, and visitors within the entire facility. Deficient items were discussed with the Administrator at the exit conference.
Plan of correction · submitted by the facility
Corrective ActionThe facility installed wheel chaulks for the cooking appliances that were missing them. ProcedureThe procedure for implementing the corrective action is to perform an inspection of the cooking appliances to monitor them for floor chaulks. MonitoringThe monitoring of the procedure will be completed monthly by the Maintenance Director for three months. The maintenance Director or designee will perform the inspections and keep a written record of each. The monthly monitoring of the wheel chaulks will be reported by the Administrator to the Quality Assurance and Assessment meeting following the implementation of the POC and for three months following. TitleThe Maintenance Director is responsible for the implementation of the Plan of CorrectionDate11/06/24
0341Fire Alarm System - InstallationS/S F▼
Findings
Based on observation during the course of the survey it was determined the facility failed to notify DFPC for installation of a new FACP. This is evident through NFPA 101 and NFPA 72.1. Fire panel was replaced on 8/22/24 need to come in for a plan reviewNFPA 10119.3.4 Detection, Alarm, and Communications Systems. 19.3.4.1 General. Health care occupancies shall be provided with a fire alarm system in accordance with Section 9.6.9.6.1.3 A fire alarm system required for life safety shall be installed, tested, and maintained in accordance with the applicable requirements of NFPA 70, National Electrical Code, and NFPA 72, National Fire Alarm and Signaling Code, unless it is an approved existing installation, which shall be permitted to be continued in use. NFPA 7210.18.1 Approval and Acceptance. 10.18.1.1 The authority having jurisdiction shall be notified prior to installation or alteration of equipment or wiring. 10.18.1.2* At the authority having jurisdiction ' s request, complete information regarding the system or system alterations, including specifications, type of system or service, shop drawings, input/output matrix, battery calculations, and notification appliance circuit voltage drop calculations, shall be submitted for approval. 10.18.1.3 Before requesting final approval of the installation, if required by the authority having jurisdiction, the installing contractor shall furnish a written statement stating that the system has been installed in accordance with approved plans and tested in accordance with the manufacturer ' s published instructions and the appropriate NFPA requirements. 10.18.1.4* The record of completion form, Figure 10.18.2.1.1, shall be permitted to be a part of the written statement required in 10.18.1.3. When more than one contractor has been responsible for the installation, each contractor shall complete the portions of the form for which that contractor had responsibility. 10.18.1.5 The record of completion form, Figure 10.18.2.1.1, shall be permitted to be a part of the documents that support the requirements of 10.18.2.4. This deficiency has the potential to affect occupants, who might include staff and visitors within the basement level. Deficient items were discussed with the Administrator and Maintenance Director at the exit conference.
Plan of correction · submitted by the facility
Corrective ActionThe facility contacted the third-party installation company to request they complete the notification process and request DCFP to complete the review process for the new FACP.ProcedureThe procedure for implementing the corrective action is to communication with Meridian Fire and DCFP for correct notification and approval for completion of work. MonitoringThe monitoring of the procedure will be completed monthly by the Maintenance Director. The maintenance Director or designee will communication with Meridian and DCFP to meet compliance. The Administrator will report to the Quality Assurance and Assessment meeting following the implementation of the POC.TitleThe Maintenance Director is responsible for the implementation of the Plan of CorrectionDate12/05/24
0353Sprinkler System - Maintenance and TestingS/S F▼
Findings
Through observation during the documentation review, it was determined that the facility failed to meet the protection requirements in accordance with NFPA 101, 25, and 13.1. Room 139, the laundry room, and the walk-in freezer have a corroded sprinkler head 2. There are wires on the sprinkler pipe in the Fire Riser room and in the basement storage room. 3. The freezer and walk-in cooler sprinkler heads need to be intermediate temperature sprinkler heads. 19.3.5.1 Buildings containing nursing homes shall be protected throughout by an approved, supervised automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 9.7, unless otherwise permitted by 19.3.5.5. NFPA 25 5.2.1.1.2 Any sprinkler that shows signs of any of the following shall be replaced: (1) Leakage, (2) Corrosion, (3) Physical damage, (4) Loss of fluid in the glass bulb heat responsive element, (5)* Loading (6) Painting unless painted by the sprinkler manufacturer. NFPA 25 5.2.2.2 Sprinkler piping shall not be subjected to external loads by materials either resting on the pipe or hung from the pipe. NFPA 13 8.3.2.58.3.2.5* The following practices shall be observed to provide sprinklers of other than ordinary-temperature classification unless other temperatures are determined or unless high-temperature sprinklers are used throughout, and temperature selection shall be in accordance with Table 8.3.2.5(a), Table 8.3.2.5(b), and Figure 8.3.2.5:(1)Sprinklers in the high-temperature zone shall be of the high-temperature classification, and sprinklers in the intermediate-temperature zone shall be of the intermediate-temperature classification.(2)Sprinklers located within 12 in. (305 mm) to one side or 30 in. (762 mm) above an uncovered steam main, heating coil, or radiator shall be of the intermediate-temperature classification.(3)Sprinklers within 7 ft (2.1 m) of a low-pressure blowoff valve that discharges free in a large room shall be of the high-temperature classification.(4)Sprinklers under glass or plastic skylights exposed to the direct rays of the sun shall be of the intermediate-temperature classification.(5)Sprinklers in an unventilated, concealed space, under an uninsulated roof, or in an unventilated attic shall be of the intermediate-temperature classification.(6)Sprinklers in unventilated show windows having high-powered electric lights near the ceiling shall be of the intermediate-temperature classification.(7)Sprinklers protecting commercial-type cooking equipment and ventilation systems shall be of the high- or extra high–temperature classification as determined by use of a temperature-measuring device. (See 7.10.6.)(8)Sprinklers protecting residential areas installed near specific heat sources identified in Table 8.3.2.5(c) shall be installed in accordance with Table 8.3.2.5(c).(9)Ordinary-temperature sprinklers located adjacent to a heating duct that discharges air that is less than 100°F (38°C) are not required to be separated in accordance with Table 8.3.2.5(a).(10)Sprinklers in walk-in type coolers and freezers with automatic defrosting shall be of the intermediate-temperature classification or higher. These deficiencies can potentially affect occupants, including residents, staff, and visitors throughout the facility. The administrator and maintenance director discussed deficient items at the exit conference.
Plan of correction · submitted by the facility
Corrective ActionThe facility will replace the identified corroded sprinkler heads, remove wiring on sprinkler piping and replace walk in cooler heads to intermediate. ProcedureThe procedure for implementing the corrective action is to perform an inspection of all sprinkler heads to ensure they are continuously maintained free of all corrosion and to monitor for wires to be kept off sprinkler piping. MonitoringThe monitoring of the procedure will be completed monthly by the Maintenance Director for three months. The maintenance Director or designee will perform the inspections and keep a written record of each. The monthly monitoring of the sprinkler head will be reported by the Administrator to the Quality Assurance and Assessment meeting following the implementation of the POC and for three months following. TitleThe Maintenance Director is responsible for the implementation of the Plan of CorrectionDateScheduled Maintenance Date: 11/21/2024
0363Corridor - DoorsS/S E▼
Findings
Based on observation, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain corridor doors in accordance with NFPA 101 and NFPA 80. 1. 242 door gapping greater than ½ inch on the floor 2. Doors 245, 120 and 127 do not fully latchNFPA 80 5.2.1* Fire door assemblies shall be inspected and tested not less than annually, and a written record of the inspection shall be signed and kept for inspection by the AHJ.NFPA 101 7.2.1.3.3 Thresholds at door openings shall not exceed 1/2 in. (13 mm) in height. NFPA 101, 19.3.6.3.1* Doors protecting corridor openings in other than required enclosures of vertical openings, exits, or hazardous areas shall be doors constructed to resist the passage of smoke and shall be constructed of materials such as the following: (1) 13/4 in. (44 mm) thick, solid-bonded core wood(2) Material that resists fire for a minimum of 20 minutesNFPA 101, 19.3.6.3.5* Doors shall be provided with a means for keeping the door closed that is acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction, and the following requirements also shall apply:(1) The device used shall be capable of keeping the door fully closed if a force of 5 lbf (22 N) is applied at the latch edge of the door.(2)Roller latches shall be prohibited on corridor doors in buildings not fully protected by an approved automatic sprinkler system in accordance with 19.3.5.7. This deficiency has the potential to affect occupants, who might include residents, staff, and visitors within the entire facility. Deficient items were discussed with the administrator and maintenance director at the exit conference.
Plan of correction · submitted by the facility
Corrective ActionThe facility fixed the door in room 242 to meet code with a gap not exceeding ½ inch in height. Rooms 120, 127, and 245 were corrected to fully latch. ProcedureThe procedure for implementing the corrective action is to perform an inspection of all fire doors to ensure they are continuously maintained to fully latch and meet the requirement for clearance between bottom of door and floor to not exceed ½ inch. MonitoringThe monitoring of the procedure will be completed monthly by the Maintenance Director for three months. The maintenance Director or designee will perform the inspections and keep a written record of each. The monthly monitoring of the doors will be reported by the Administrator to the Quality Assurance and Assessment meeting following the implementation of the POC and for three months following. TitleThe Maintenance Director is responsible for the implementation of the Plan of CorrectionDate11/20/24
0511Utilities - Gas and ElectricS/S D▼
Findings
Based on observation and staff interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain wiring in accordance with NFPA 101, 99 and NFPA 70.1. Room 237 has string lights around the room. NFPA 101 9.1.2 Electrical Systems. Electrical wiring and equipment shall be in accordance with NFPA 70, National Electrical Code, unless such installations are approved existing installations, which shall be permitted to be continued in service. NFPA 99 6.3.2.1.1 Distribution system arrangements shall be designed to minimize interruptions to the electrical systems due to internal failures by the use of adequately rated equipment. 590.3 Time Constraints.(B) 90 Days. Temporary electric power and lighting installations shall be permitted for a period not to exceed 90 days for holiday decorative lighting and similar purposes. This deficiency can potentially affect occupants, who might include residents, staff, and visitors within this area of the smoke compartment of the facility. Deficient items were discussed with the administrator and maintenance director at the exit conference
Plan of correction · submitted by the facility
Corrective ActionThe facility removed the string lights from resident room 237. ProcedureThe procedure for implementing the corrective action is to perform an inspection of all resident rooms to ensure they meet life safety requirements pertaining to string lights. MonitoringThe monitoring of the procedure will be completed monthly by the Maintenance Director for three months. The maintenance Director or designee will perform the inspections and keep a written record of each. The monthly monitoring of the resident rooms will be reported by the Administrator to the Quality Assurance and Assessment meeting following the implementation of the POC and for three months following. TitleThe Maintenance Director is responsible for the implementation of the Plan of CorrectionDate10/30/24
10/3/2024Complaint, Recertification Survey · ID 895W11No deficiencies▼
0000Initial CommentsSurveyor note2 building records▼
Findings · record 1 of 2
A recertification survey with complaint #CO37582 was completed on 9/30/24 to 10/3/24. No deficiencies were cited.
Findings · record 2 of 2
An Emergency Preparedness survey was conducted from 9/30/24 to 10/3/24. No deficiencies were cited.
Plan of correction
The state did not require a plan of correction for this citation.
9/9/2024Complaint Survey · ID ZQ4811No deficiencies▼
0000INITIAL COMMENTSSurveyor note▼
Findings
A complaint survey, prompted by #CO37235 was conducted on 9/9/24. No deficiencies were cited.
Plan of correction
The state did not require a plan of correction for this citation.
6/26/2023Revisit: Recertification Survey · ID LVBC22No deficiencies▼
0000INITIAL COMMENTSSurveyor note▼
Findings
All Tags have been corrected and facility now complies.
Plan of correction
The state did not require a plan of correction for this citation.
Reportable Occurrences
21 records3/22/2026Misappropriation of Property · ID 2602R209003Reported on time: Yes▼
Occurrence summary
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS:On 3/23/26, the healthcare entity investigated a reportable event. The facility acted appropriately to protect their clients by taking immediate protective actions, investigating the event, and implementing a plan to help prevent a future recurrence. The healthcare entity reported a misappropriation of property event. Client (A) reported $40 missing from their room. During the course of the investigation, the healthcare entity conducted a search and interviews. Management offered a lockbox to help secure their valuables. Staff located $36 in the laundry and upon review of client (A)'s account showed a recent withdrawal of $36. The money was returned, and the event was not substantiated. This public occurrence summary was provided in accordance with 25-1-124, C.R.S., and was based on the report and investigation provided by the licensed healthcare entity. Department investigation of this occurrence was conducted off-site. The healthcare entity occurrence report was submitted within the required timeframe.
Publication
Sent to facility 5/28/2026 · released to the public 6/4/2026.
2/6/2026Brain Injury · ID 2602R209002Reported on time: Yes▼
Occurrence summary
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS:On 2/7/26, the healthcare entity investigated a reportable event. The facility acted appropriately to protect their clients by taking immediate protective actions, investigating the event, and implementing a plan to help prevent a future recurrence. The healthcare entity reported a brain injury event. Staff observed client (A) on the floor with a head injury. Client (A) was transported to the hospital for further evaluation. Diagnostic test results showed two brain bleeds, rib fracture, spinal fractures, and a skull fracture. During the course of the investigation, the healthcare entity conducted a post fall review, record review and interviews. The facility concluded the client got up by self without calling for assistance and fell. Safety measures were in place. Upon their return from the hospital, staff reassessed client (A)'s fall safety needs, provided education to call for staff assistance and reassessed her toileting plan. The event was substantiated. This public occurrence summary was provided in accordance with 25-1-124, C.R.S., and was based on the report and investigation provided by the licensed healthcare entity. Department investigation of this occurrence was conducted off-site. The healthcare entity occurrence report was submitted within the required timeframe.
Publication
Sent to facility 4/27/2026 · released to the public 5/4/2026.
12/18/2025Sexual Abuse · ID 2502R209008Reported on time: Yes▼
Occurrence summary
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS:On 12/18/25, the healthcare entity investigated a reportable event. The facility acted appropriately to protect their clients by taking immediate protective actions, investigating the event, and implementing a plan to help prevent a future recurrence. The healthcare entity reported a sexual abuse event. Client (A) alleged she had been raped by a staff member. The alleged incident occurred several months earlier, and she was only reporting it now. Emotional support was provided. During the course of the investigation, the healthcare entity conducted an assessment and interviews, reviewed care needs, notified the police, and implemented two-person female care when addressing personal needs. A forensic evaluation occurred at the hospital, which did not identify any signs of sexual trauma. Staffing schedules were reviewed and staff interviewed. No assailant matching client (A)’s description could be identified. Review of physician orders for client (A)’s care needs identified two invasive treatments involving her private area were in place, which management indicated these treatments could be contributing to client (A)’s allegation of being violated. A trauma informed care plan was initiated for client (A). Treatment orders were changed to minimize invasive interventions. Client (A)’s allegation was not substantiated. This public occurrence summary was provided in accordance with 25-1-124, C.R.S., and was based on the report and investigation provided by the licensed healthcare entity. Department investigation of this occurrence was conducted off-site. The healthcare entity occurrence report was submitted within the required timeframe.
Publication
Sent to facility 2/19/2026 · released to the public 2/26/2026.
12/12/2025Misappropriation of Property · ID 2502R209007Reported on time: Yes▼
Occurrence summary
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS:On 12/12/25, the healthcare entity investigated a reportable event. The facility acted appropriately to protect their clients by taking immediate protective actions, investigating the event, and implementing a plan to help prevent a future recurrence. The healthcare entity reported a misappropriation of property event. After client (A) transferred to the hospital, client (A)’s family reported client (A)’s air pod earphones were missing. A phone search indicated the pods were initially at the facility, and then the location changed to an apartment. During the course of the investigation, the healthcare entity conducted a search and interviews. With the address provided for the current location of the air pods, management reported none of the staff addresses matched that location. The missing property could not be recovered, and the person responsible was not identified. The facility reimbursed the family. A new process was implemented for securing client belongings when they are transferred out of the facility. The event was substantiated. This public occurrence summary was provided in accordance with 25-1-124, C.R.S., and was based on the report and investigation provided by the licensed healthcare entity. Department investigation of this occurrence was conducted off-site. The healthcare entity occurrence report was submitted within the required timeframe.
Publication
Sent to facility 2/19/2026 · released to the public 2/26/2026.
8/22/2025Death · ID 2502R209006Reported on time: Yes▼
Occurrence summary
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS: On 8/21/25, the healthcare entity investigated a reportable event of death. Client (B) expired in the facility post complications associated after a choking incident. During the course of the investigation, the healthcare entity conducted interviews from involved staff, reviewed diet orders and care plan needs and conducted a record review. The facility indicated the client received the proper diet and assistance with his meal, which resulted in an unfortunate choking incident, comfort measures and death. This public occurrence summary was provided in accordance with 25-1-124, C.R.S., and was based on the report and investigation provided by the licensed healthcare entity. The department review of the occurrence investigation was conducted off-site. The healthcare entity occurrence report was submitted within the required timeframe. In addition, this event has been identified for further investigation by the Department. An onsite investigation was conducted by a representative from the State agency. For results of that on-site investigation, please reference https://cdphe.colorado.gov/find-and-compare-facilities, specifically the inspection dated 9/3/25, Event ID 1D5AB1-H1.
Publication
Sent to facility 9/11/2025 · released to the public 9/18/2025.
4/28/2025Equipment Misuse · ID 2502R209005Reported on time: No▼
Occurrence summary
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS:On 5/2/25, the healthcare entity investigated a reportable event. The facility acted appropriately to protect their clients by taking immediate protective actions, investigating the event, and implementing a plan to help prevent a future recurrence. The healthcare entity reported an equipment misuse event. Reportedly, staff found client (B)’s air mattress not inflated at the proper setting for pressure relief. Client (B) had recently developed an unstageable pressure ulcer and an air mattress was added to his treatment plan. During the course of the investigation, the healthcare entity checked the functionality of the mattress system, conducted audits on other air mattresses, and conducted a record review, wound assessment, and staff interviews. Staff indicated the setting had been altered for about three hours that day. No one could identify what happened to cause the change in the settings. There was no reported adverse finding to the current wound. The facility concluded there was no intentional misuse of equipment, and the pressure settings did not result in an adverse outcome. Educational reminders were provided to staff on the manufacturer’s guidelines with air mattresses and to continue monitoring the settings every shift. The event was not substantiated. This public occurrence summary was provided in accordance with 25-1-124, C.R.S., and was based on the report and investigation provided by the licensed healthcare entity. Department investigation of this occurrence was conducted off-site. The healthcare entity occurrence report was not submitted within the required timeframe.
Publication
Sent to facility 9/3/2025 · released to the public 9/10/2025.
4/17/2025Brain Injury · ID 2502R209004Reported on time: Yes▼
Occurrence summary
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS: On 4/18/25, the healthcare entity investigated a reportable brain injury event. Client (B) fell hitting her head and suffered a laceration. During the course of the investigation, the healthcare entity provided first aid treatment until she could be transferred to the hospital for further evaluation of uncontrolled bleeding from the head laceration. Family declined diagnostic tests at the hospital. The laceration was closed via sutures, and she returned on continued hospice services. Staff reported the client’s mental and physical status changed post fall. Her safety plan was reassessed. The facility determined the client fell when attempting to transfer self. The brain injury event was substantiated. This public occurrence summary was provided in accordance with 25-1-124, C.R.S., and was based on the report and investigation provided by the licensed healthcare entity. The department review of the occurrence investigation was conducted off-site. The healthcare entity occurrence report was submitted within the required timeframe. In addition, this event has been identified for further investigation by the Department. An onsite investigation was conducted by a representative from the State agency. For results of that on-site investigation, please reference https://cdphe.colorado.gov/find-and-compare-facilities, specifically the inspection dated 6/5/25, Event ID 3BO211.
Publication
Sent to facility 7/10/2025 · released to the public 7/17/2025.
3/2/2025Brain Injury · ID 2502R209003Reported on time: Yes▼
Occurrence summary
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS:On 3/3/25, the healthcare entity investigated a reportable event. The facility acted appropriately to protect their clients by taking immediate protective actions, investigating the event, and implementing a plan to help prevent a future recurrence. The healthcare entity reported a brain injury event. Reportedly, client (B) fell and then experienced unresponsive episodes the following days. During the course of the investigation, the healthcare entity conducted post fall assessments and reassessed client (B)’s safety needs. Client (B) remained in the facility as the focus was comfort care. She transitioned to hospice services. The facility determined client (B) accidentally rolled out of bed when trying to reach her call light that had fallen on the floor. Due to neurological changes, a brain injury event was substantiated. This public occurrence summary was provided in accordance with 25-1-124, C.R.S., and was based on the report and investigation provided by the licensed healthcare entity. Department investigation of this occurrence was conducted off-site. The healthcare entity occurrence report was submitted within the required timeframe.
Publication
Sent to facility 7/23/2025 · released to the public 7/30/2025.
10/8/2024Neglect · ID 2402R209009Reported on time: Yes▼
Occurrence summary
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS: On 10/8/24, the healthcare entity investigated a reportable event. The facility acted appropriately to protect their clients by taking immediate protective actions, investigating the event, and implementing a plan to prevent a future recurrence. The healthcare entity reported a neglect event. During the course of the investigation, the healthcare entity reported staff #1 transferred client (B) with an incorrect mechanical lift resulting in a fall with upper extremity bruising. Re-education occurred with staff on reading the information sheets, mechanical lifts, and safe transfers. The facility concluded staff #1 did not utilize her resident information sheet and incorrectly transferred the client using the wrong equipment. The event was substantiated. This public occurrence summary was provided in accordance with 25-1-124, C.R.S., and was based on the report and investigation provided by the licensed healthcare entity. Department investigation of this occurrence was conducted off-site. The healthcare entity occurrence report was submitted within the required timeframe.
Publication
Sent to facility 3/19/2025 · released to the public 3/26/2025.
9/23/2024Death · ID 2402R209007Reported on time: Yes▼
Occurrence summary
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS: On 9/23/24, the healthcare entity investigated a reportable event. The facility acted appropriately to protect their clients by taking immediate protective actions, investigating the event, and implementing a plan to prevent a future recurrence. The healthcare entity reported a death event involving client (A). During the course of the investigation, the health care entity reported staff discovered the client on the floor with abnormal vital signs. This happened five hours post admission. Staff called 911, and while on the phone, the client’s vital signs ceased. He was a DNR and expired. A review of nursing notes, admission assessments and staff interviews occurred. The facility determined all policies and procedures were followed correctly. Client (A)’s medical provider concluded the death was related to his acute complex diagnoses and co-morbidities and not related to the fall. The event was substantiated. This public occurrence summary was provided in accordance with 25-1-124, C.R.S., and was based on the report and investigation provided by the licensed healthcare entity. Department investigation of this occurrence was conducted off-site. The healthcare entity occurrence report was submitted within the required timeframe.
Publication
Sent to facility 2/6/2025 · released to the public 2/13/2025.