15
Inspections on file
22
Deficiencies cited
4
Visits with none
0
Substandard care
0
Immediate jeopardy

The most recent inspection on file for Bickford of Lancaster took place on May 20, 2026. Across the 15 inspections published by the Ohio Department of Health, surveyors cited 22 deficiencies.

A deficiency is a rule the surveyor found the facility was not meeting. Ohio inspects against two rule books at once, so most findings carry a federal code and an Ohio code for the same problem; each is counted once here, the way the state counts it. Correction dates are the state's confirmation that the issue was fixed.

This report reproduces what Ohio publishes and nothing else. Of the 15 inspections listed, the state publishes the surveyor's written findings for 11; for the other 4 it publishes only the date, the type of visit and the number of deficiencies - 4 of which found none.

Facility Details

Ohio license number
#2461R
County
Fairfield
Administrator
Monica Coffelt
Director of nursing
Lakeisha Perrin
Phone
(740) 689-9944
Ownership
For Profit - Corporation

Inspections

15 on file · 22 deficiencies
May 20, 2026Complaint survey2 deficiencies
R-0339Administered meds - given only to and as prescribedOhio citation · correction confirmed 06/15/2026
What the surveyor found

Based on staff interviews, resident interviews, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to administer medications as prescribed by physician. This affected three (#81, #143, and #162) of three residents reviewed for medication administration. The facility census was 91.

Findings include:

Review of Resident #81's medical record and facility's incident log dated 05/05/26 confirmed a medication error occurred. Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #9 documented Resident #81 received medications intended for another resident. Resident #81 received Eliquis (blood thinner) 5.0 milligrams (mg), Gabapentin (treats nerve pain) 100 mg tablet, Mucinex (treats cold symptoms) 30-600 milliequivalents (meq) extended release, and potassium chloride (vitamin) 20 meq extended release, which were not ordered for Resident #81.

Review of the facility's incident log dated 05/14/26 confirmed a medication error occurred. LPN #58 documented that Resident #162 was inadvertently administered another resident's prescribed medications.

Review of the facility's incident log dated 05/18/26 confirmed medication error occurred affecting Resident #143.. Medication Technician #65 documented Resident #143 was given incorrect medications unintentionally.

Interview on 05/20/26 at 12:30 P.M. with Resident #143 confirmed that she had been administered the wrong medications on one occurrence at the facility.

Interview on 05/20/26 at 5:20 P.M. with Executive Director (ED) confirmed she was aware of the recent medication errors at the facility involving Resident #81, #162, and #143. Two of the three medications that occurred in May 2026 were medication errors in relation to Medication Technician #65. During medication error on 05/05/26 involving Resident #81 and LPN #9, LPN #9 prepared the medication and Medication Technician #65 gave the medication to the wrong resident (Resident #81). LPN #42 and new LPN #58 were responsible for 05/14/26 medication error involving Resident #162. LPN #42 was training LPN #58 at the time. The ED stated that an in-service with the nurses was completed 05/18/26 regarding medication administration in which Medication Technician #65 did attend. After this in service education on medication administration, Medication Technician #65 had another medication error on 05/18/26 where she administered Resident #143 the wrong medications. The ED stated she was in the termination process for Medication Technician #65.

Review of the facility's Medication Administration Policy dated 05/2026 revealed the residents are expected to be identified prior to the administration of medications. Medications should be prepared and administered by the same person.

This violation represents non-compliance investigated under Complaint Number OH00170611.

Rule
Ohio Administrative Code - residential care rules
R-0720PrivacyOhio citation · correction confirmed 06/15/2026
What the surveyor found

Based on observation, resident and staff interview, and review of resident council meeting minutes, the facility failed to ensure residents received privacy while receiving medications from the licensed personnel. This affected one (#131) of three residents observed for medication administration. The facility census was 91.

Findings include:

Observation of medication administration on 05/20/26 from 11:23 A.M. to 11:33 A.M. revealed nine residents were sitting and standing in line in the hallway waiting to receive medications. At 11:26 A.M., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #22 administered Resident #131 insulin in the hallway, where the other eight residents were.

Interview 05/20/26 at 12:05 P.M. with Resident #86 revealed nurses were slow to administer him medications and residents have to wait in line in the hallway a long time for their medications. Resident #86 stated he does not like doing this three times per day.

Interview 05/20/26 at 5:20 P.M. with Executive Director revealed residents do wait in line for medications in the hallway and extra seating was provided for them there.

Review of the resident council meeting minutes dated 04/03/26 revealed residents were concerned about more couches by the medication room.

This was an incidental finding discovered during the complaint investigation.

Rule
Ohio Administrative Code - residential care rules
April 7, 2026Complaint survey · listed in Ohio's index; no findings report publishedNo deficiencies
No deficiencies cited
Ohio lists this visit in its inspection index with no deficiencies. The state publishes a findings report only when a visit cites something, so there is no further detail to show.
December 31, 2025Complaint survey1 deficiency
R-0712Adequate and appropriate treatment and careOhio citation · correction confirmed 04/07/2026
What the surveyor found

Based on interview and record review the facility failed to prevent a resident from exiting the facility unsupervised (elopement). This affected one resident (#65) of three sampled for elopement. The facility census was 81.

Findings include:

Review of Resident #65's medical record revealed a move in date of 12/17/25 and diagnoses of acute anxiety, behavioral disorders associated with dementia, dementia and depression.

Review of Resident #65's previous primary care provider's documentation revealed a note written on 11/03/25 indicating the resident was leaving her home at night per her neighbor who was caring for her.

Review of the facility Resident Assessment dated 12/17/25 at 1:36 P.M. and completed by the Health and Wellness Director (HWD) indicated Resident #65 needed minimal assistance such as occasional help due to forgetfulness and difficulty concentrating due to cognitive impairment. Further review revealed the resident needed minimal assistance such as cueing or reminders if wandering, and requires individualized activities to encourage social engagement due to wandering and elopement risk.

Review of Resident #65's service plan dated 12/17/25 revealed the resident requires cueing or reminders if wandering, individualized activities to encourage social engagement. The care team were to provide redirection when the resident was wandering or attempting to leave the building unassisted in order to keep her safe.

Review of Resident #65's Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE - a cognitive examination) dated 12/17/25 and completed by the HWD revealed a score of 23/30 indicating mild cognitive impairment.

Review of Resident #65's facility notes revealed a note written by Wellness Nurse #246 on 12/17/25 at 1:59 P.M. stating the resident arrived at the facility and appeared anxious, wanted to go home and was exit seeking. Further review revealed a note written by Wellness Nurse #246 on 12/17/25 at 5:34 P.M. Resident continues with exit seeking behaviors with multiple staff attempts to redirect. Resident did sit down to have dinner and then continues wandering stating she needs to go home.

Further review of the facility notes revealed a note written by Caregiver #221 on 12/18/25 at 5:35 A.M. Resident was upset because she could not find her car, aide called POA (power of attorney) to find out where the car was, POA stated it was at the resident's house. Resident said she wants to go home and will pay someone to take her home or she will hike home. Caregiver #221 made sure management and nurse on duty were aware of Resident #65's statements (as per the facility note documentation).

Review of Resident #65's elopement incident report revealed the resident exited the facility on 12/18/25 around 11:30 P.M. by tearing the window screen and exiting through her window. Her facility watch (used by the facility as a call system and to detect falls) alarm was triggered and staff discovered the resident missing and activated elopement protocol including notifying the police. The police found and returned the resident to the facility. Follow up actions included repair of the window screen, review of elopement prevention measures, and update the care plan to include additional safety interventions. Wellness Nurse #263 entered a note on 12/19/25 at 6:11 A.M. that read Resident was under elopement watch throughout the night by staff.

Review of witness statement dated 12/18/25 written by Caregiver #228 revealed Resident #65 had attempted to exit the memory care unit to the assisted living part of the facility three times between 11:15 P.M. and 11:30 P.M. At 11:30 P.M. Resident #65 was in her room and her fall alert sounded saying outside of the salon, the aide stated she had watched the resident go into her room so she went in there and found the window screen destroyed and the resident missing. She notified the other aides and the nurse and went outside to search for the resident.

Review of witness statement dated 12/18/25 written by Caregiver #230 revealed Resident #65 was found by the police after about 45 minutes.

Review of witness statement dated 12/18/25 written by Wellness Nurse #263 revealed she was notified of the resident being missing and staff checked the building and the outside of the building and she notified management, the police and the resident's family. She was returned to the facility by the police and the Health and Wellness Director (HWD) assessed her and found her to be ok.

Review of Resident #65's psychiatric evaluation dated 12/19/25 revealed the resident had a brief interview for mental status score of three indicating the resident was severely cognitively impaired. Zoloft 50 milligrams daily and Namenda 5 milligrams twice daily were added to the resident's medication list and it was recommended the resident be encouraged to participate in groups and activities.

Review of Resident #65's special care needs in her care routines plan, updated on 12/30/25, indicated the facility was installing window alarms and the resident was seeing the facility psychiatry provider.

In an interview on 12/29/25 at 1:53 P.M. Resident #65's niece revealed the resident had significant memory loss and could not recall new information for more than a few minutes at a time. The niece stated the resident did not dress appropriately for the weather, she had walked to a neighbor's wearing flip flops and a wind breaker in 20 degree weather recently. She stated that she had stayed with the resident recently and the resident was up all night wandering the house. She stated the facility was aware of the resident's wandering.

In an interview on 12/29/25 at 2:30 P.M. with Resident #65's former neighbor revealed the resident had, in the past couple of months, gone to another neighbor's house at 3:00 A.M. and walked into the the bedroom and asked that neighbor why they were in bed. The former neighbor stated this had occurred at least three times to her knowledge. The former neighbor further stated that she believed the resident was up wandering her own home at night most nights.

In an interview on 12/29/25 at 3:02 P.M. the HWD stated that she assessed the resident on 12/18/25 when she was returned to the facility and found her to be confused but uninjured. The resident was found by the police across the street in a residential area. The HWD stated that she assisted the resident to change her clothes upon her return to the facility as it had been raining outside. The HWD stated the resident was wearing off white capris style pants, a sweater and a hat and she assisted her into changing into fleece pajamas. Resident #65's temperature upon her return to the facility was 98.5 degrees Fahrenheit.

In an interview on 12/29/25 at 3:50 PM the HWD stated the widow screen was replaced and an alarm was ordered for the window but had not been delivered.

In an interview on 12/30/25 at 11:30 A.M. the HWD stated the root cause of the elopement was the resident did not want to be at the facility. The HWD stated the staff is keeping her engaged in activities during the day and checking on her four times during the night.

In an interview on 12/30/25 at 12:45 P.M. the Executive Director stated they were aware Resident #65 had dementia and that she wandered, that was why they placed her on the secure memory care unit. The facility felt that the memory care unit was very secure and they did not anticipate her going out of a window. The ED stated that she ordered five window alarms that would sound loudly when a window was opened. One of the alarms is for Resident #65 and the rest are for use with any future residents who exit seek. The alarms are to arrive on Friday (01/02/26).

An interview was attempted with Resident #65 on 12/24/25 at 10:30 A.M. and again on 12/29/25 at 3:45 P.M. without success. The resident was unable to answer screening questions.

This violation represents non-compliance investigated under Complaint Number #169220.

This violation is a recite to the complaint survey completed 10/15/25.

Rule
Ohio Administrative Code - residential care rules
October 15, 2025Complaint survey2 deficiencies
R-0661Maintain clean environment; housekeeping, garbage, rodentsOhio citation · correction confirmed 12/31/2025
What the surveyor found

Based on observation, interview, and review of housekeeping policies, the facility failed to ensure furniture was maintained appropriately. The facility also failed to ensure chemicals were secured in a locked cabinet on a memory care unit. This had the potential to affect all residents residing in the facility. The facility census was 90.

Findings include:

1. Observation on 10/15/25 at 7:51 A.M. revealed in the main restroom off the main dining room had feces on the door handle to the wheelchair accessible toilet. There were also feces on the toilet seat of the toilet in the first stall and feces in both toilet bowls of the other stalls. Housekeeper #58 verified the observation at the time.

Interview on 10/15/25 at 7:53 A.M. with Housekeeper #58 who stated she is the only housekeeper for the facility, and she works Monday through Friday 7:30 A.M. until 4:00 P.M. Housekeeper #58 stated the main restroom off the main dining room is like that most of the time and confirmed the residents do use this restroom. Housekeeper #58 stated she cleans the main common areas daily and the caregivers are to clean in between when she isn't in the facility.

2. Observation of the memory care unit on 10/15/25 at 8:56 A.M. revealed a grey love seat facing the dining area with multiple large, brown urine stains which covered the grey cushion in the back of the love seat, down the front of the love seat and on top of the cushion where residents sit. There were also four blue chairs with a leaf-like pattern which had brown stains in variable sizes. One of the blue chairs with a leaf-like pattern had a brown stain in the middle of the seat cushion, the size of a playing card. The other three blue chairs with a leaf-like pattern had several brown stains the size of dimes and quarters in each of the chairs. In addition, there were two multi-colored chairs of blue, brown, and beige color on the memory care unit which contained multiple dime and quarter size brown stains and brown urine ring stains on the bottom seat cushions in each of them. Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #29 confirmed the multiple brown stains, brown urine ring stains in each of the six chairs and the two grey love seats at the time of the observation. LPN #29 stated the furniture only gets spot cleaned as needed.

Interview on 10/15/25 at 9:13 A.M. with Caregiver #43 confirmed the odor on the grey love seat with the large, brown urine rings was urine odor. Additionally, Caregiver #43 stated the furniture was only spot cleaned when a resident soils it and that there is no deep cleaning of the furniture on the memory care unit.

3. Observation on 10/15/25 at 9:18 A.M. of the kitchen cabinets on the memory care unit revealed one bottle of odor eliminator, two bottles of bathroom cleanser, three containers of dishwasher liquid for the dishwashers, one bottle of bathroom cleanser, all bottles were opened and being used and located in unlocked cabinets. Health and Wellness Coordinator #28 confirmed the opened containers in unlocked cabinets at the time of the observation.

4. Observation on 10/15/25 at 9:18 A.M. of the cabinets under the serving counter on the memory care unit revealed dark black and brown spots under the sink area, the bottom falling in on the bottom of the inside cabinet and looked wet and mostly black and brown. Both cabinets were unlocked. Health and Wellness Coordinator confirmed at the time of the observation.

5. Observation on 10/16/25 at 1:47 P.M. in the assisted living common area in front of the receptionist desk revealed two grey love seats which had large brown urine rings on the back of the love seats, the front going down the love seats, and on the seat cushions of the love seats. LPN # #34 confirmed the brown urine ring stains on both grey love seats at the time of the observations.

Interview on 10/15/25 at 7:59 with Caregiver #42 who stated that housekeeping does scheduled cleaning, but if the caregivers see something which needs to be cleaned even in the common areas, they are to clean it.

Interview on 10/16/25 at 11:42 A.M. with LPN #41 who stated if she sees furniture which needs cleaned, she will tell the caregivers to clean the furniture with the green machine or to take the cushions off and clean them.

Review of the facility Resident Handbook, undated, stated under housekeeping and laundry revealed the facility would maintain a clean, aesthetic and pleasant building for the physical and well-being of all our residents, staff, and visitors.

Review of the facility Admission Agreement, undated, under Housekeeping, Laundry, and Maintenance Service stated housekeeping services shall include cleaning of community space and availability of cleaning of apartment, including bathroom, kitchen area, and other living space.

This violation represents non-compliance investigated under Complaint Number OH00168495.

Rule
Ohio Administrative Code - residential care rules
R-0712Adequate and appropriate treatment and careOhio citation · correction confirmed 04/07/2026
What the surveyor found

Based on observations, record review, staff interviews, and facility policy, the facility failed to respond to an elopement and failed to investigate an elopement. This affected one (Resident #20) of three reviewed for elopement. This facility census was 90.

Findings include:

Review of the medical record for Resident #20 revealed an admission date of 09/15/25 with medical diagnoses of osteoarthritis, paresthesia of both feet, Schatzki's ring, spinal stenosis, vitamin B-complex deficiency, cataract, and skin cancer.

Review of the mini mental state examination (MMSE) dated 09/18/25 revealed Resident #20 scored 18 out of 30 which indicated mild cognitive impairment.

Review of the Resident Care Summary pulled 10/16/25 indicated Resident #20 is an elopement risk.

Review of the progress note dated 10/03/25 at 11:21 P.M. created by the Division Director of Operations (DDO) stated Resident #20's daughter contacted DDO to report that the resident was not in the facility and had shown up at her sons' residence. Upon receiving this information, DDO immediately went to the branch and spoke with the Executive Director (ED) and floor staff. The ED promptly utilized bus to go bring the resident back to the branch. The POA was notified of the actions taken to ensure the residents safe return and continued well-being. An investigation is being completed.

Interview on 10/15/25 at 11:22 A.M. and 12:49 P.M. with Resident #20's POA stated Resident #20 showed up at the resident's home address, which is where POA's son is staying. POA stated she called the DDO on 10/03/25 at 5:00 P.M. because she had made a complaint to the facility corporate office on 09/29/25 and had spoken to the DDO on 09/29/25 about the lack of communication, as she had been trying to reach the ED for two weeks. The POA stated that on 09/29/25 she had told the DDO that Resident #20 would try to leave the facility and the DDO stated that there was no way the resident could leave the facility without someone knowing. The POA stated she received a call from her son on 10/03/25 that Resident #20 had showed up at the house, and he didn't know how she had gotten there. The POA called the DDO because she had her number from their discussion on 09/29/25. The POA reported she asked the DDO if she knew where Resident #20 was and the DDO stated that Resident #20 was at the facility. The POA then told the DDO that Resident #20 was at the home address with Resident #20's grandson and they don't know how Resident #20 got to the house. POA stated the DDO said she would have someone go to pick up the resident at the home address and return her to the facility. The POA called the local police to Resident #20's home address. The POA stated there was one and a half hours unaccounted for between the last time Resident #20 was seen in the facility until she showed up at the home address. The POA reported there was no real follow up on 10/04/25 and that she hasn't heard anything else from leadership regarding the incident. The POA reported Resident #20 does not take off her alarm bracelet unless she is scratching her wrist and then puts it back on immediately.

Interview on 10/15/25 at 11:22 A.M. and 12:49 P.M. with Resident #20 stated she walked out of the facility and up to the road to walk home. Resident #20 stated she is not familiar with the area, but as she was walking a man stopped and asked her where she was going. Resident #20 stated she told the man she was going home and that the man dropped her at the end of her home address driveway. Resident #20 stated she was walking a long way before the man stopped. She reported it was hot that day. Resident #20 stated that the ED picked her up at home and took her to the ED's home and then brought her back to the facility on 10/04/25.

Interview on 10/15/25 at 1:17 P.M. with Occupational Therapy Assistant (OTA) #70 reported Resident #20 has cognitive deficits, memory and orientation are both inconsistent. OTA #70 stated Resident #20 does pretty well functionally but does need assistance with Activities of Daily living (ADLs) for hygiene, reminders to change her clothes, and reminders to complete a toilet with proper hygiene. OTA #70 stated prior to 10/03/25, Resident #20 was always asking for a phone to call a taxi and was exit seeking. OTA #70 stated she wasn't surprised that Resident #20 had left the facility but was surprised that Resident #20 made it all the way to Canal Winchester.

Interview on 10/15/25 at 3:11 P.M. with Resident #83 who had a key fob for the front door. Resident #83 reported he usually sits by the front door. Resident #83 reported he doesn't know all the names of the residents in the facility, but he recognizes some. Resident #83 also stated if a resident doesn't have a key fob, then he would let them out the front door with his key fob. Resident #83 reported if there was a new resident and he didn't know them, then he would probably let them out the front door with his key fob.

Interview on 10/15/25 at 2:08 P.M. with Caregiver #25 stated she was working on 10/03/25 during the evening shift when Resident #20 left the facility. Caregiver #25 reports there are alarms on the doors, but if you push on them, they will open after fifteen seconds. Additionally, she stated the alarm goes off really loud in the facility. Caregiver #25 stated you can hear the alarm anywhere in the building and on the work phone. Caregiver #25 reported the alert on the work phone when the door alarms says geo-fence with the resident's name who is near the door or out of the door. The alert on the work phone says temp not connected when the battery needs changed or the resident is outside of the area of the alarm. Caregiver #25 stated on 10/03/25 there was an alert which came to her work phone, but she didn't look at it until 5:00 P.M. Caregiver #25 stated the work phone does buzz or makes noise to let you know there is an alert. Caregiver #25 stated she went to Resident #20's room around 5:00 P.M. on 10/03/25 and the room door was locked. She reported she had to find another caregiver to get a key to go into Resident #20's room and when the door was opened, they discovered Resident #20 was gone. Caregiver #25 stated she didn't hear any door alarms beeping on 10/03/25. Caregiver #25 reported she has known Resident #20 to not be allowed outside unsupervised since Resident #20 was admitted to the facility.

Interview on 10/15/25 at 2:40 P.M. with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #34 stated she was working at the facility on 10/03/25. LPN #34 reported she observed Resident #20 in the medication room about 3:00 P.M. LPN #34 reported she did not know Resident #20 was missing until the DDO came into the facility at about 5:40 P.M. on 10/03/25 and asked LPN #34 if she knew where Resident #20 was at. LPN #34 told DDO that she had last seen Resident #20 around 3:00 P.M. LPN #34 stated she did not hear the door alarms on 10/03/25 and she did not observe Resident #20's alarm bracelet in Resident #20's room. LPN #34 reported Resident #20 is confused at times and doesn't like being at the facility. LPN #34 stated she isn't sure how long Resident #20 was out of the facility.

Interview on 10/15/25 at 4:09 P.M. with Resident #20's Grandson, who had lived with Resident #20 for 22 years before Resident #20 went to live in the facility, revealed Grandson reported he saw Resident #20 walking up the driveway to the home on 10/03/25 at about 5:00 P.M. Resident #20 was wearing a sweater, sweatpants, and shoes and had her purse with her. Grandson stated Resident #20 wanted a television (t.v.) dinner and ice cream which she ate at the kitchen table. Grandson reported Resident #20 was confused and kept talking about going to work. Grandson reported Resident #20 does have a cell phone and was wearing her alarm bracelet when she arrived at the home address. Grandson stated Resident #20 had multiple falls over the summer, was confused and hallucinating, and walking out of the house confused which is part of the reason Resident #20 was in the hospital and then transferred to the facility. Grandson reported Resident #20 was at the home address for about one and a half hours before the police and facility staff arrived to take Resident #20 back to the facility.

Interview on 10/16/25 at 1:57 P.M. with Caregiver #14 who reported the alert on the work phone will say geo-fencing with the resident's name if the resident is near the door or has left through the door and once the resident gets to the main road, then the alert would say tempo not connected with the resident's name. It does this when a resident leaves for an appointment or if the resident leaves with their family. Then you go into the alert on the work phone and there are options which you can choose, like family or appointment or if it's a mistake and the resident is still here, then you can press test. Caregiver #14 also stated most residents who can be outside unsupervised have a key fob and the ones who don't have a key fob to get outside are the ones who can't be outside unsupervised. You don't really know which residents are not allowed unsupervised. Caregiver #14 stated that once you work here for a while, then you learn who the residents are and who can't be outside unsupervised.

Interview on 10/16/25 at 2:21 P.M. Caregiver #3 stated she has heard the front door alarm and it's really loud and obnoxious, the front desk phone starts ringing and calls all the work phones. Caregiver #3 reports she wasn't working on 10/03/25. Caregiver #3 stated Resident #20 is confused. Everyday Resident #20 asks for her room number and talks to Caregiver #3 about random things. Caregiver #3 stated Resident #20 sits near the front door all the time and always has her purse with her. Caregiver #3 reported that she doesn't know of any residents who are allowed to be outside unsupervised.

Interview on 10/16/25 at 2:36 P.M. with Health and Wellness Coordinator (HWC) #28 stated she was off work on 10/03/25 but received a call at 7:40 P.M. from DDO who asked her to come to the facility and complete a skin assessment on Resident #20 which she did and it was noted in the progress notes. HWC stated she was not aware of anything being stated that Resident #20 could not be allowed outside unsupervised and since her MMSE was 27 and she lives in the Assisted Living unit, then she is allowed to go outside unsupervised. HWC #28 reported she doesn't know if Resident #20 has a key fob. HWC #28 stated she has not seen Resident #20 going to the exit doors and wasn't alerted by family of Resident #20's exit seeking behaviors. HWC #28 reported that alarm bracelets are standard issue to all the residents when they come to live at the facility. HWC #28 reported there was an investigation completed on the evening of 10/03/25 and the staff on duty that night were re-educated. HWC #28 stated there is no documentation that the staff were re-educated on 10/03/25 and there is no documented investigation. Additionally, HWC #28 stated she can't find the maintenance for the door alarm system.

Interview on 10/16/25 at 3:50 P.M. with the Health and Wellness Director (HWD) stated she was off work on 10/03/25 and was not aware that Resident #20 had left the facility until 10/04/25. HWC reported the on alert by the progress notes means we are to continue to watch the residents as they could be an escape artist. We should be on alert and watch for them. HWC stated that Resident #20 and POA have been very vocal about Resident #20 wanting to leave the facility, but that she hasn't seen Resident #20 by the exit doors. HWC reported that POA has two key fobs and she isn't sure if Resident #20 has one. HWC stated that Resident #20 is allowed to go outside unsupervised as she lives in the Assisted Living unit. HWC verified the MMSE score of the MMSE she gave to Resident #20 on 09/29/25 as 18/30 to indicate mild cognitive impairment. HWC verified there was no investigation documentation related to the incident on 10/03/25.

Interview on 10/16/25 at 4:15 P.M. with DDO confirmed she received a call from Resident #20's POA at 5:04 P.M. on 10/03/25 alerting her to the fact that Resident #20 was no longer at the facility and was at the home address. The DDO reported she tried to reach someone at the facility but was unable to reach anyone, so she drove to the facility and spoke to them. Then the DDO called the ED (who is no longer working for the facility since 10/04/25) who took the facility bus and went to pick up Resident #20 at the home address. The DDO reported she waited at the facility for the ED and Resident #20 to return to the facility. The DDO also called HWC and asked her to complete a skin assessment on Resident #20 when she returned to the facility. The DDO stated she gave instructions to the ED and HWC to investigate the incident on 10/03/25. The DDO confirmed there is no documented investigation or re-education of the staff regarding the incident which occurred on 10/03/25. The DDO reported that the ED must have taken it with her when she quit. The DDO verified that Resident #20's alarm bracelet was not connected to the facility's system at 3:47 P.M. or 3:57 P.M. on 10/03/25 and did not re-connect until Resident #20 was returned to the facility.

Review of the facility Door Inspection Sheet dated 09/26/25, 10/03/25, and 10/10/25 revealed the front door alarm was working and no repairs needed.

Review of the facility Life Safety policy dated 12/2024 stated resident incidents or accidents are to be reported and documented immediately after they occur. Additionally, the facility Life Safety policy stated incidents or accidents can include but are not limited to f) resident elopements. The ED and or HWD/HWC shall a) investigate incidents or accidents involving resident b) document investigation and corrective action regarding the incident or accident c) implement corrective action as appropriate e) incidents that negatively affect or that threaten the life, health, safety, or welfare of any resident will be reported per State Licensing Agency.

Review of the personnel files for all staff working on 10/03/25 revealed no education for elopement training before or after 10/03/25.

Review of Google map revealed the distance from the facility to Resident #20's home address is between 19 miles to 23.2 miles depending on the route taken and approximately 26 minutes to 34 minutes to arrive by driving.

This violation was an incidental finding found during the course of the complaint investigation.

Rule
Ohio Administrative Code - residential care rules
September 29, 2025Complaint survey2 deficiencies
R-0333Personal care services provided appropriatelyOhio citation · correction confirmed 12/31/2025
What the surveyor found

Based on medical record review, staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision and assistance during toileting for a resident assessed at the highest fall risk. This resulted in Actual Harm when Resident #97 was left unattended in the bathroom, fell off the toilet, and sustained a cervical (neck) fracture and forehead avulsion (body structure is torn off by either trauma or surgery). This affected one (Resident #97) of seven residents reviewed for accidents. The facility census was 94.

Findings include:

Review of Resident #97's medical record revealed an admission date of 10/18/21.

Resident #97's fall risk assessment dated 07/09/25 identified the resident as a Level III fall risk, the highest category, due to a history of falls with injury, unsteady gait, transfer/ambulation problems, and cognitive decline.

The service plan dated 07/09/25 directed staff to provide full assistance with all bathroom activities and hygiene, including scheduled and unscheduled escorts and incontinence care. The plan also required hands-on assistance with transfers and instructed staff to always watch when Resident #97 was up and walking. Resident #97 required frequent help due to disorientation, memory loss, and difficulty completing tasks. Resident #97 had poor safety awareness and had sun downing which started around 3:00 P.M. daily. The special care needs plan for frequent and ongoing assistance with addressing special care needs. Safety checks were three times per shift.

Review of the progress notes revealed Resident #97 fell multiple times and sustained injuries. Resident #97's falls included the following seven dates: 10/02/24, 12/14/24, 01/27/25, 03/21/25, 04/11/25, 06/21/25, and 08/31/25. Resident #97 fell in the bathroom on five of the falls (10/02/24, 12/14/24, 01/27/25, 06/21/25, and 08/31/25).

On 10/02/24 at 12:50 A.M., Resident #97 was found on the bathroom floor after attempting to use the toilet, sustaining a skin tear to the right elbow. The fall intervention was added safety checks to service plan to take to bathroom more often and make sure Resident #97 was safe.

On 12/14/24 at 8:00 P.M., Resident #97 was found in the bathroom on her back with head under the sink, reporting confusion and had knee and elbow pain. The fall intervention was increasing Resident #97's involvement in activities.

On 01/27/25 at 7:00 A.M., Resident #97 was found on the bathroom floor near the sink after toileting, complaining of midback pain with redness noted to her back. The fall intervention was 'increased' (undefined) safety checks.

On 03/21/25 at 4:06 P.M., Resident #97 fell while walking without her rollator, she fell and sustained a left hip fracture and required hospitalization. Fall interventions were to remind Resident #97 to always use her walker and make sure it is within her reach.

On 04/11/25 at 8:46 P.M., Resident #97 fell while in her room sustaining a skin tear. The fall intervention was frequent safety checks four times per shift; However, the fall intervention was not listed in Resident #97's service plan.

On 6/21/25, Resident #97 was found in the bathroom next to sink. Resident #97 took herself to the bathroom and fell backwards and cut her elbow and arm. All staff were re-educated to assist residents with toileting on 08/11/25. During an interview with Health Wellness Coordinator (HWC) on 09/29/25 at 12:55 P.M., she started in the HWC position in June and was not aware of implementing new fall interventions after a resident's fall and this was the reason for the delay in intervention for Resident #97's fall on 06/21/25.

On 08/31/25 at 7:40 A.M., a resident care assistant (RCA) took Resident #97 to the bathroom and sat Resident #97 on the toilet and stepped outside the room briefly and found Resident #97 on the floor with a forehead injury. Resident #97 complained of feeling dizzy, and her head and the back of her neck hurt. Resident #97 was removed from the floor and placed back into her chair and her forehead injury opened and the skin and tissue were pushed back and was bleeding. The nurse applied a towel on her head with pressure to control bleeding. Emergency 911 was called, and Resident #97 was taken to the emergency room (ER). At the hospital, Resident #97 was diagnosed with a C2 neck fracture and forehead avulsion. The fall intervention was Resident #97 was not to be left alone in the bathroom.

Review of RCA #500's statement revealed on 08/31/25, RCA #116 assisted Resident #97 with morning care. Resident #97 was assisted to the bathroom and Resident #97 requested some privacy. RCA #116 stepped outside the bathroom door when RCA #116 heard a loud thud. RCA #116 peaked into the bathroom and saw Resident #97 on the floor.

Review of Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #600's written statement revealed when LPN #600 entered Resident #97's bathroom, the resident was sitting on her floor and wanted to get up. RCA #116 and LPN #600 assisted Resident #97 to her wheelchair and saw the resident had an injury to her forehead that was bleeding and applied a towel to her head to stop the bleeding. Resident #97 complained that her neck hurt.

Review of the Disciplinary/Counseling Report dated 09/04/25 revealed RCA #116 received her first warning for violating the company's policy. On 08/31/25 at 7:40 A.M., RCA #116 left Resident #97 in the bathroom, sitting on the toilet and stepped outside the bathroom door at resident's request. This violated the resident's service plan.

In an interview on 09/15/25 at 5:20 P.M., the Director of Nursing stated the aide should have requested assistance rather than leaving the resident alone and confirmed the facility had no formal policy on how long residents may be left unattended in the bathroom.

In an interview on 09/29/25 at 1:15 P.M., the Administrator verified RCA #116 had received a written warning for failure to follow Resident #97's service plan.

Review of the facility's Resident Supervision and Safety policy revealed it required staff to follow each resident's individual service plan to ensure safe provision of care.

This violation represents non-compliance investigated under Complaint Number OH00168165.

Rule
Ohio Administrative Code - residential care rules
R-0711Free from abuseOhio citation · correction confirmed 12/31/2025
What the surveyor found

Based on observation, record review, staff interviews, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure Residents #84 and #85 were free from abuse. This affected five (Residents #2, #79, #80, #84, and #85) of seven residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 94.

Findings include:

1. Review of Resident #80's medical record revealed an admission date of 02/05/24. Diagnoses included dementia with agitation and mood disorder.

Resident #80's service plan dated 01/09/25 directed psycho-social engagement activities in the afternoon and evening and safety checks three times per shift due to agitation and exit-seeking.

Review of the progress note dated 09/14/25 at approximately 2:00 P.M., a resident care assistant (RCA) reported hearing a resident yelling Leave me alone. Upon turning to assess the situation, the RCA witnessed Resident #80 physically assaulting another resident (#84) by punching them in the face. A police report was filed.

Review of Resident #84's medical record revealed an admission date of 12/03/22. Diagnoses included altered mental status and bipolar disorder.

During an interview on 09/14/25 at 9:38 A.M., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #86 confirmed Resident #80 struck Resident #84 in the face in the memory care unit. Resident #84 did not exhibit visible injury. Resident #80 was transported to the hospital for a psychological evaluation and returned later the same day.

During an interview on 04/14/25 at 4:02 P.M., RCA #12 confirmed she observed Resident #80 physically punch Resident #84 in the face.

2. Review of Resident #79's medical record revealed an admission date of 09/05/24. Diagnoses included dementia, insomnia, and bipolar disorder.

Review of the progress note dated 09/27/25 at 2:30 P.M. revealed Resident #79 was yelling at another resident (#2) when another resident (#85) went to intervene, he started to choke Resident #85.

Review of the written statement by Resident Care Associate (RCA) #135 dated 09/27/25 revealed Resident #79 yelled at another resident (#2), then placed both hands around Resident #85's neck. Resident #85 was noted with redness to the neck.

During an interview on 09/29/25 at 8:43 A.M., RCA #139 stated she assisted in the unit while police interviewed the RCA (#135) who witnessed the event. Facility documentation confirmed law enforcement responded, and staff were interviewed on-site.

During observations on 09/29/25 at 8:45 A.M., Resident #85 did not have any bruising or redness around her neck.

During an interview on 09/29/25 at 10:57 A.M., the Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed Resident #79 strangled Resident #85 using his hands. The DON stated she was working on the unit during this time but did not witness the incident. RCA #135 was in the dining room cleaning up tables. Resident #79 started to yell at Resident #2 and Resident #85 and RCA #135 came to intervene and Resident #79 started to strangle Resident #85's neck. RCA #135 immediately got Resident #79's hands off Resident #85. Resident #85 cried for a few seconds then was calm. The DON took Resident #79 outside and administered as needed Xanax (anti-anxiety medication) to Resident #79. Resident #79 was unable to recall the incident and remained calm during the rest of the day. Resident #79 has been taking his medications routinely for the past three months. Resident #79 was seen by psych in June and changed his medications and he has been stable since then.

Review of the facility's Abuse and Neglect policy last revised 02/2025 revealed the residents were to be free from abuse.

This violation represents non-compliance investigated under Complaint Number OH00168165.

This violation is an example of continued non-compliance from the survey dated 08/13/25.

Rule
Ohio Administrative Code - residential care rules
August 13, 2025Complaint survey2 deficiencies
R-0391Resident incidents and log; identify resident upon requestOhio citation · correction confirmed 12/31/2025
What the surveyor found

Based on record review, staff interview and facility policy review, the facility failed to complete a thorough investigation regarding a fall for Resident #86 and an incident of resident-to-resident abuse between Resident #86 and Resident #75. This affected two (Residents #86 and #75) of three residents reviewed for incidents. Additionally, the facility failed to keep an incident log separate from the resident record which had the potential to affect all residents residing in the facility. The facility census was 96.

Findings include:

1. Review of the medical record for Resident #86 revealed an admission date of 12/03/22 with diagnoses including altered mental status, dementia, and hypertension.

Review of the nursing note dated 06/06/25 at 10:56 A.M. documented that the nurse entered Resident #86's bathroom to administer medications and observed bruising and swelling to the right side of the forehead, left-sided facial drooping, and increased confusion. The resident was not following commands. Vital signs were recorded as blood pressure 161/109, heart rate 94, and blood sugar 118. The note indicated that the resident was sent to the hospital and later returned with a diagnosis of contusion and abrasion to the head, with no new orders. Subsequent notes documented increased bruising to the forehead and nose over the next several days.

There was no documentation of the circumstances surrounding the fall, no witness statements, no post-fall assessment documenting possible cause, no environmental assessment, and no documented follow-up to determine if interventions should be implemented or revised.

Review of the care plan for Resident #86 included fall interventions to assist with dressing and to educate the resident on the use of comfortable, properly fitting nonslip footwear. There was no evidence of any new interventions implemented after the fall on 06/06/25.

During an interview on 08/13/25 at 11:21 A.M., Health and Wellness Director (HWD) #20 confirmed that when there was a fall, the resident was placed on alert for 72 hours, vital signs were monitored, and interventions were put in place. HWD #20 confirmed there was no documented investigation for the fall on 06/06/25 and no follow-up with witness statements or environmental assessment. HWD #20 stated that their intervention after the unwitnessed fall was to send Resident #86 to the hospital, but no new interventions were implemented.

2. Review of the medical record for Resident #75 revealed an admission date of 04/04/25.

Review of the progress note dated 07/26/25 at 7:30 A.M. revealed, resident (Resident #86) pushed another resident (Resident #75) against the door and walked away aide helped out with the situation. No further documentation of an investigation into this incident was found in the medical record or any other investigative files.

Interview on 08/13/25 at 10:06 A.M. with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #60 revealed that she witnessed Resident #86 push Resident #75 into the door. She stated she intervened to redirect the residents but confirmed there was no investigation conducted following the incident.

Interview on 08/13/25 at 11:06 A.M. with CNA #32 confirmed that the 07/26/25 interaction between Resident #86 and Resident #75 was the only known resident-to-resident physical contact involving Resident #86 and that she was not aware of any investigation having been completed.

Interview with the Administrator on 08/13/25 at 12:41 P.M. confirmed that no investigation had been conducted after the 07/26/25 incident, despite acknowledgment that the event constituted potential abuse. She reviewed available documentation in the presence of the surveyor and was unable to locate any investigative notes, witness statements, interviews, or follow-up actions.

Interview with HWD #20 on 08/13/25 at 1:05 P.M. confirmed there was no documented investigation of the 07/26/25 incident. She stated that the facility did not complete follow-up statements, resident checks, or other investigative measures.

Review of the facility's policy titled PP-60100 - Abuse and Neglect (Revised 02/2025) revealed the following requirement: An internal investigation must be completed and documented on the Investigation Report form for all allegations of abuse, neglect, or exploitation. Bickford Family Members ... shall report the information immediately to the Branch Executive Director or Health & Wellness Director and the State licensure authority ... within 24 hours. The policy further required obtaining information from the person making the report, the resident(s) involved, next of kin, and any additional information to aid in the investigation.

3. Review of the facility's incident log revealed that the facility printed incidents and notes from residents' medical charts and used these as their incident log.

Interview on 08/13/25 at 11:21 A.M. with HWD #20 confirmed that the facility was not keeping an incident log separate from the residents' medical charts.

This violation represents non-compliance investigated under Complaint Number OH00167882.

Rule
Ohio Administrative Code - residential care rules
R-0711Free from abuseOhio citation · correction confirmed 12/31/2025
What the surveyor found

Based on record review, staff interviews and facility policy review, the facility failed to conduct a documented investigation after a resident's family voiced concern of neglect involving Resident #86 sitting outside in excessive heat. This affected one (Resident #86) out of three residents reviewed for abuse and neglect. The facility census was 96.

Findings include:

Review of the medical record revealed Resident #86 was admitted on 12/03/22 with diagnoses including altered mental status, dementia, hypertension, and paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.

Review of Resident #86's medical record revealed no documentation of an investigation after a family member reported on 07/25/25 that it was too hot for the resident to be outside at all that day.

During interview on 08/13/25 at 11:21 A.M., the Health and Wellness Director (HWD) #20 confirmed there was no specific policy outlining physical monitoring timeframes for residents sitting outside on the secured memory care unit. Staff interviews revealed inconsistent practices regarding how often residents outside were physically checked, ranging from every 10 minutes to every 30 minutes, and confirmed no follow-up investigation was completed after the family's concern of neglect.

During interview on 08/13/25 at 12:41 P.M., the Administrator confirmed the family's concern had been communicated to staff on 07/25/25 and that, besides holding a care conference, no additional investigation regarding possible neglect had been conducted. The Administrator confirmed there was no written evidence of interviews, observations, or staff statements related to the allegation of neglect.

Review of the facility's policy titled PP-60100 - Abuse and Neglect (Revised 02/2025) revealed the following requirements: An internal investigation must be completed and documented on the Investigation Report form for all allegations of abuse, neglect, or exploitation. Bickford Family Members ... shall report the information immediately to the Branch Executive Director or Health and Wellness Director and the State licensure authority... within 24 hours. The policy further required obtaining information from the person making the report, the resident(s) involved, the next of kin, and any additional information to aid in the investigation.

This violation represents non-compliance investigated under Complaint Number OH00167882.

Rule
Ohio Administrative Code - residential care rules
June 25, 2025Complaint survey · listed in Ohio's index; no findings report publishedNo deficiencies
No deficiencies cited
Ohio lists this visit in its inspection index with no deficiencies. The state publishes a findings report only when a visit cites something, so there is no further detail to show.
May 14, 2025Complaint survey1 deficiency
R-0338Administered meds - MD ordersOhio citation · correction confirmed 07/11/2025
What the surveyor found

Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were administered as ordered and/ or documentation was included in the residents' records to explain why a medication was not signed off as having been given. This affected three residents (#11, #31, and #48) of three residents reviewed for medications.

Findings include:

1. Review of Resident #11's medical record revealed he was admitted to the facility on 04/16/21. His diagnoses included adult onset diabetes mellitus, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, hypertensive heart disease, and prostatic hyperplasia.

Review of Resident #11's electronic medication administration record (eMAR) for February 2025 revealed there were several medications that were not initialed by the nurse electronically to show physician ordered medications were given. The resident was not indicated to have received the following medication as ordered: Albuterol Aerosol HFA two puffs orally twice a day for the 4:00 P.M. to 6:00 P.M. dose on 02/10/25; Basaglar 65 units subcutaneously (SQ) twice a day for the 8:00 A.M. to 10:00 A.M. dose and the 4:00 P.M. to 7:00 P.M. dose on 02/10/25; Fiasp Flextouch 100 units/ milliliter SQ four times a day before meals and at bedtime per sliding scale on 02/07/25 at 7:00 P.M. to 10:00 P.M., or on 02/10/25 at 8:00 A.M. to 10:00 A.M., 4:00 P.M. to 5:00 P.M., and 7:00 P.M. to 10:00 P.M.; and Gabepentin 100 milligrams (mg) three times a day for the 4:00 P.M. to 6:00 P.M. dose on 02/10/25. The nurse did not indicate on the eMAR that these medications had been refused by the resident or had been withheld for any reason when they were ordered to be given. The eMAR included eMAR notes where the nurses could document exceptions and pass notes for the resident, but those eMAR notes did not explain why the nurse did not initial these medications as having been given.

Review of Resident #11's nurses' progress notes revealed there was no documentation in the nurses' notes to indicate why the nurse did not initial the eMAR's to reflect the above medications were administered as ordered. There was no indication that that the medications had been refused by the resident or that they were not administered for any particular reason.

2. Review of Resident #31's medical record revealed he was admitted to the facility on 06/10/22. His diagnoses included atrial fibrillation, benign prostatic hyperplasia, and congestive heart failure.

Review of Resident #31's eMAR for February 2025 revealed the nurse did not initial the eMAR to reflect the resident received the following medications on 02/10/25 at 5:00 P.M. to 7:00 P.M.: Eliquis 5 mg by mouth (po) as ordered twice a day for atrial fibrillation, Tamsulosin 0.4 mg po as ordered once daily for BPH, and Torsemide 40 mg po as ordered twice a day for CHF. The eMAR notes that were included as part of the eMAR did not provide any rationale as to why the nurse did not sign the eMAR to reflect the resident had been given those medications on 02/10/25 between 5:00 P.M. and 7:00 P.M. as ordered.

Review of Resident #31's nurses' progress notes revealed they were also absent for any documentation to explain why the above medications were not signed off on the eMAR as having been given. There was no indication of the resident refusing those medications at that time or that they were held for any other reason.

3. Review of Resident #48's medical record revealed she was admitted to the facility on 03/13/22. Her diagnoses included pain in her bilateral knees, hypothyroidism, hypertension, and gastro-esophageal reflux disease.

Review of Resident #48's eMAR's for January 2025 revealed the nurses did not initial the eMAR to reflect the resident was given the following medications as ordered by the physician: Acetaminophen as ordered three times a day for pain between 1:00 P.M. to 2:00 P.M. on 01/17/25, 01/23/25, 01/26/25, 01/27/25, or on 01/29/25; Amoxicillin 500 mg capsules as ordered three times a day between the hours of 12:00 P.M. and 2:00 P.M. on 01/21/25, 01/26/25, and on 01/27/25; Areds eye multivitamin po as ordered twice daily between the hours of 5:00 P.M. and 7:00 P.M. on 01/22/25; Levothyroxine 100 micrograms po as ordered every morning between 5:00 A.M. and 7:00 A.M. on 01/20/25; Losartan Potassium 100 mg po as ordered every day between 5:00 P.M. to 7:00 P.M. on 01/04/25 and 01/22/25; Metformin 500 mg po as ordered BID between 5:00 P.M. and 7:00 P.M. on 01/22/25; Prilosec 20 mg po as ordered every day between 5:00 A.M. to 7:00 A.M. on 01/20/25; Prednisone 20 mg po as ordered once daily at 8:00 A.M. on 01/03/25, 01/04/25, and 01/05/25.

Review of Resident #48's eMAR's for February 2025 revealed the nurses did not initial the eMAR to show the resident had been given Acetaminophen 500 mg po as ordered three times day for a total of nine doses that month. Azo tablets that were ordered to be given twice a day for UTI prevention was not documented as having been given three times that month. Estradiol 0.01% vaginal cream was not documented as having been given every night at bedtime on Mondays and Thursdays once that month. Pepcid 40 mg tablets that were ordered to be given twice a day were not signed off as having been given three separate times that month when it was scheduled to be given. Multiple other medications to include Fluconazole, DuoNeb, Lactobacillus, Levothyroxine, Lidocaine 4% patch, Mucus Relief 30-600 mg, Prilosec, Solifenacin, and Tramadol also had missing initials by the nurses providing no evidence of the resident being given those medications as ordered.

Review of Resident #48's nurses' progress notes revealed they were absent for any evidence of the resident having refused the above medications on the dates the nurses failed to initial the medications as having been given. There was also no evidence of those medications being held for other reasons.

On 05/14/25 at 8:50 A.M., an interview with the facility's Director of Nursing (DON) revealed she could not find any documented evidence of Resident #11, #31, or #48 having been given those medications that were ordered by the physician and had not been signed off for in the eMAR's for the months of January and February 2025 to show they had been given. She denied she was able to find anything on the eMAR notes or in the progress notes to reflect why the nurses may have not initialed them as having been given. She did not see where the medications had been refused by the residents or that they were held by the nurse for another reason. She confirmed if a medication had been given it should have been initialed as such on the eMAR. If it was refused or held, it should also be reflected as such on the eMAR with additional documentation provided in the eMAR notes or the nurses' progress notes.

This violation represents non-compliance investigated under Complaint Number OH00165181.

Rule
Ohio Administrative Code - residential care rules
April 7, 2025Complaint survey · listed in Ohio's index; no findings report publishedNo deficiencies
No deficiencies cited
Ohio lists this visit in its inspection index with no deficiencies. The state publishes a findings report only when a visit cites something, so there is no further detail to show.
March 17, 2025Complaint survey2 deficiencies
R-0350Requirements for applications of dressingsOhio citation · correction confirmed 12/31/2025
What the surveyor found

Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to provide a comprehensive and individualized pressure ulcer prevention and treatment program for Resident #85. The facility also failed to ensure only licensed qualified staff provided wound care/dressing changes.

Actual harm occurred on 01/03/25 when Resident #85, who required full staff assistance for personal care, developed a red area to her right hip that progressed to an unstageable pressure ulcer (full-thickness skin and tissue loss in which the extent of tissue damage within the ulcer cannot be confirmed because it is obscured by slough (dead cells in the wound that is often yellow or green tinged and stringy) or eschar) without appropriate preventative and maintenance interventions implemented by the facility to prevent the development/deterioration of the ulcer. This affected one resident (#85) of two residents reviewed for wound care. The facility census was 88.

Findings include:

Review of Resident #85's medical record revealed a move in date of 08/22/22 with diagnoses including diabetes, hypothyroidism, stress and urge incontinence, and chronic peripheral venous insufficiency.

Review of Resident #85's service plan dated 01/30/25 revealed the resident required full (staff) assistance with bathing, grooming, dressing, eating and oral care. The resident required the use of a mechanical (Hoyer) lift for transfers and received a pureed diet with her liquids thickened to the consistency of nectar.

Further review of the service plan revealed the facility was to coordinate Resident #85's care with her hospice provider. There was no mention on the service plan of any type of preventative skin interventions or the resident's risk for pressure ulcer development or interventions to implement other than monitoring and changing incontinence brief as needed.

Review of the Treatment Administration Record (TAR) for December 2024 through February 2025 revealed the resident was to receive Calmoseptine ointment twice a day to the coccyx (order originated 10/12/22). The order was initialed by facility nursing staff twice a day.

Review of the TAR for December 2024 revealed the resident had an order to apply Desitin (zinc oxide skin protectant) to bony prominences twice a day. The order was initiated on 12/04/24 and to be provided twice a day by nursing staff.

Review of Resident #85's hospice provider #1 record revealed a note written on 01/03/25 at 11:30 A.M. indicating the resident had an area of redness caused by pressure on her right hip that had improved.

Further review of the medical record revealed no documentation from the facility regarding the resident's skin alteration to her right hip or intervention to prevent the area from progressing further.

Review of Resident #85's hospice provider #1 record revealed a note written on 01/08/25 at 9:00 A.M. indicating the resident had a Stage 1 pressure area to her right hip that was being treated by an application of zinc ointment (medicated cream rubbed on to the skin to treat irritation) and then covered with a bordered foam gauze to pad and protect the area of irritation. The note also indicated resident favored laying on her right side.

Further review of the medical record revealed there was no mention of the Hospice visit or the resident's skin alteration to her right hip.

Review of Resident #85's hospice provider #1 records revealed a note written on 01/20/25 at 9:30 A.M. indicating the wound on right hip had increased in size and a picture was sent to Resident #85's medical provider for new treatment orders.

Further review of the medical record revealed no evidence the facility noted the resident's pressure ulcer to her right hip or any interventions regarding the pressure ulcer.

Review of Resident #85's hospice provider #1 record revealed a nurse's note written on 01/23/25 at 9:00 A.M. indicating the wound on the right hip had opened and is leaking fluid. New treatment orders were obtained to cleanse the wound with normal saline and apply calcium alginate, (dressing used to absorb excess moisture and to promote healing and reduce the risk of infection) and cover with bordered foam dressing.

Review of Resident #85's medical record revealed a nurse's note written on 01/23/25, with no time indicated, stating new treatment orders were obtained to cleanse the wound with normal saline and apply calcium alginate and cover with bordered foam dressing.

Review of the medical record revealed no evidence of any type of assessment or description of the resident's pressure ulcer completed by facility staff at this time. The order was noted on the January 2025 TAR as to change every three days and was signed as completed on the TAR on 01/26/25 and 01/29/25.

Review of Resident#85's hospice provider record revealed on 01/26/25 Resident #85 signed on with a new hospice provider #2. The hospice physician's certification of terminal illness indicated Resident #85 had an unstageable wound on her right hip.

Review of Resident #85's medical record revealed a nurse's note written on 01/26/25 indicating that per Resident #85's hospice provider the resident had an unstageable wound on her right hip. Review of the record revealed no evidence of any type of assessment or description of the resident's pressure ulcer completed by facility staff at this time.

Review of Resident #85's hospice provider #2 record revealed a note written on 01/27/25 (no time indicated) indicating Hospice Registered Nurse (RN) #300 removed the dressing on Resident #85's right hip that was placed by the previous hospice provider. The wound was large unstable pressure area with foul smelling drainage. Resident #85 was noted to have pain when the dressing was changed.

Further review of the medical record revealed no mention of the resident's right hip pressure ulcer.

Review of Resident #85's hospice provider record revealed a note written on 01/28/25 (no time indicated) indicating that prior to the dressing to the right hip being changed, drainage was noted to be draining out of the old dressing.

Further review of the medical record revealed no mention of the resident's right hip pressure ulcer.

Review of Resident #85's hospice provider record revealed a note written on 01/29/25 (no time indicated) indicating Hospice RN #300 obtained orders for the calcium alginate, to the right hip pressure area, to be covered by a nonstick pad and for an abdominal gauze pad to be placed over the nonstick pad and the area to then be covered by a Tegaderm dressing.

Review of Resident #85's medical record revealed a routine yearly resident assessment completed on 01/29/25 at 2:24 P.M. There was no documentation regarding the resident's right hip pressure ulcer noted.

Review of Resident #85's hospice provider records revealed a note written on 01/30/25 (no time provided) indicating a large amount of drainage was noted to be coming from the right hip pressure area when the dressing was changed.

Further review of the medical record revealed no mention of the resident's right hip pressure ulcer.

Review of Resident #85's hospice provider records revealed a note written on 02/06/25 (no time provided) indicating Resident #85 was found lying on her right side fully on the pressure area when Hospice RN #300 arrived to perform her dressing change. When Hospice RN #300 removed the old dressing slough (soft yellow or white material that builds up on the surface of a wound and is made up of dead cells, debris and tissue that has not broken down properly) came off with it exposing granulation tissue in the wound bed. Hospice RN #300 educated the facility staff on how to turn Resident #85 without placing her directly on the wound.

Further review of the medical record revealed no mention of the resident's right hip pressure ulcer.

Review of Resident #85's hospice provider records revealed a note written on 02/07/25 (no time) indicating Resident #85 was medicated with morphine sulfate solution 0.5 mg for pain prior to the dressing on the right hip being changed because she was having increased pain during dressing changes.

Further review of the medical record revealed no mention of the resident's right hip pressure ulcer.

Review of Resident #85's hospice provider records revealed a note written on 02/10/25 (no time) indicating Resident #85 winced and yelled out during the removal of the old dressing from the right hip and was medicated with morphine sulfate solution 0.5 mg for pain and the dressing change was then completed.

Further review of the medical record revealed no mention of the resident's right hip pressure ulcer.

Review of Resident #85's hospice provider records revealed a note written on 02/17/25 (no time indicated) indicating Resident #85 was pre-medicated with morphine sulfate solution 0.5 mg for pain prior to the right hip dressing being removed. Hospice RN #300 had been informed that the dressing was changed by a facility aide over the weekend (02/15/25 or 02/16/25). When Hospice RN #300 attempted to remove the old dressing, slough was stuck to the dressing applied by the facility aide. The remaining slough in the wound bed, at the top of the wound, came off when Hospice RN #300 removed the old dressing.

Further review of the medical record revealed no mention of the resident's right hip pressure ulcer.

Review of Resident #85's medical record revealed a nurse's note dated 02/21/25, with no time indicated, that stated an 11.5 centimeter (cm) by (x) 4 cm unstageable wound to right hip was noted.

On 02/24/25 at 10:00 A.M. observation revealed Resident #85 was lying in bed on her left side. A low air loss mattress was in place on Resident #85's bed at this time.

In an interview on 03/12/25 at 3:33 P.M. the Wellness Coordinator confirmed that the low air loss mattress was placed on Resident #85's bed on 01/28/25 by the second hospice provider.

An interview on 02/24/25 at 11:45 A.M. with Resident #85's son revealed the resident had a bed sore on her right hip that was reported to him by hospice. The facility did not notify him of the pressure ulcer or about the pressure ulcer getting worse. The son stated the family had a camera in the resident's room and monitored it frequently. The son voiced concerns that staff did not provide turning and repositioning of Resident #85 every two hours as the hospice had recommended (as evidenced by the video recordings the family had). The son stated that the family had requested the resident be up in the chair during the day to ensure she was monitored by facility staff and her position was changed; she was repositioned.

In an interview on 03/12/25 at 3:33 P.M. the Wellness Coordinator revealed there was a gel cushion to Resident #85's Broda chair but she did not know the date it was placed there.

On 02/24/25 at 12:21 P.M. observation revealed Resident #85 was seated in a Broda chair in the common area covered by a blanket and she was sitting tilted to the left side.

An observation made on 02/24/25 at 3:04 P.M. revealed Resident #85 remained seated in a Broda chair in the common area covered by a blanket and tilted to the left.

Interview on 02/24/25 at 3:32 P.M. with Hospice RN #300 revealed Resident #85 had a large Stage IV (full thickness tissue loss with exposed bone, tendon, or muscle. Slough or eschar may be present on some parts of the wound bed. Often includes undermining and tunneling) pressure ulcer on her right hip. The wound was 11.5 cm in length and four cm in width. The dressing was scheduled to be changed on Monday, Wednesday and Friday by the hospice provider. If the dressing becomes soiled and needs to be changed in between, the facility called the hospice provider to change the dressing. Hospice RN #300 was not sure how long the right hip wound had been there but stated it was present when Resident #85 signed up with this hospice provider. Initially, the wound was an unstageable pressure ulcer due to the wound bed being covered with slough. Further interview revealed she was initially told by the staff the wound began as a blister. She stated the resident was up in her Broda chair (supplied by Hospice) most of the day and a foam dressing was maintained on her left hip to pad and protect the area since the resident leaned to her left side when she was up in her Broda chair.

A follow-up interview on 02/25/25 at 9:49 A.M. with Hospice RN #300 revealed that some days when entering the memory care unit there was a strong urine odor. She stated that Resident #85 normally got out of bed between 10:30 and 11:00 A.M. and did not go back to bed until after supper. She confirmed the hospice provider supplied Resident #85's low air loss mattress and hospital bed.

An observation made on 02/25/25 at 8:30 A.M. revealed Resident #85 resting on her back in bed tilted to the left with a pillow against her back.

An observation made on 02/25/25 at 10:30 A.M. revealed Resident #85 was seated in a Broda Chair in the common area. Resident #85 was tilted to the left in the chair.

Interview on 02/25/25 at 11:09 A.M. with Caregiver Assistant #229 revealed residents, including Resident #85 who were incontinent were to be changed before they get up and after meals and if they are in wheelchairs or Broda chairs they were to be repositioned at the same time.

Interview on 02/25/25 11:16 AM with Certified Caregiver #220 revealed Resident #85 was changed when she got up and after lunch. She further revealed that resident #85's family preferred her to be up in her Broda chair. She stated that they try to tilt Resident #85 off her right hip while she is in her chair. She stated they watch for signs that Resident #85 is uncomfortable and change position in the chair as much as they can.

Interview on 02/25/25 at11:50 A.M. with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #244 revealed that if a dressing on a hospice resident became soiled she would change the dressing and notify hospice. LPN #244 further revealed that nurses work from 6:00 A.M. to 7:00 P.M. or until the evening medication pass was completed and everything is done for the day. She confirmed that the facility did not have measurements of wounds other than the measurements completed by hospice . She had not changed the dressing for Resident #85 as she had been working a different hallway.

An observation made on 02/25/25 at 1:12 P.M. revealed Resident #85 remained up in a Broda chair and tilted to the left.

An observation made on 02/25/25 at 3:08 PM revealed Resident #85 remained up in a Broda chair and tilted to the left. An aide was assisting her with a drink of water.

Interview on 02/25/25 at 3:14 P.M. with Caregiver Assistant #230 revealed the aides try to shift Resident #85 around in her chair about every two hours to reposition her when they check her for incontinence. Caregiver Assistant #230 further revealed there was not a nurse in the facility after the day shift nurse leaves at 7:00 P.M. If Resident #85's dressing would become soiled the caregivers would try to call a nurse to come in and change the dressing. If no one was available to change it, then the dressing will be left alone until a nurse came in for the morning shift. Further interview revealed she had never had to call an off-duty nurse to come in to change the resident's dressing.

Interview on 02/25/25 at 3:44 P.M. with the Executive Director (ED) revealed the facility does not evaluate wounds (pressure ulcers) because those wounds were the responsibility of hospice. She stated that residents with pressure ulcers (including Resident #85) were appropriate for the assisted living care setting because hospice was involved and was responsible for the wound care.

On 02/26/25 at 8:42 A.M. Hospice RN #300 was observed to change Resident #85's right hip dressing. Resident #85 was pre-medicated for pain prior to having her dressing changed. When the old dressing was removed there was a large amount of thick yellow/green/red colored drainage on the old dressing. The nonstick pad and two abdominal gauze pads removed were saturated with the drainage. The skin surrounding the wound was intact and flesh tone in color. The wound bed was beefy red with granulation tissue. The wound edges presented with undermining (condition where the edges of the wound have separated from the underlying tissue creating a pocket or cavity below the wound surface, and tunnelling, condition where the wound expands deeper into the tissue) was noted at the one o'clock and five o'clock positions. A small dime sized area of slough was noted in the wound bed at the four o'clock position. Hospice RN #300 measured the wound as follows: length 11.5 cm, width 5 cm, and depth 0.5 cm. The tunneling at the one o'clock position measured 1.5 cm in length and at the five o'clock position measured 3 cm in length .

Interview on 02/26/25 at 9:00 A.M. with Wellness Coordinator LPN #267 revealed she had taken the position of wellness coordinator the last week of January 2025 and today was first time she had seen Resident #85's wound.

Interview on 02/26/25 at 10:10 A.M. with Hospice RN #300 revealed that from the time she started providing care for Resident #85's right hip dressing on 01/27/25 until after the first week of February 2025, the dressing should have been changed prior to hospice changing it because of the amount of drainage coming from the wound. She stated that when she arrived the dressing would be completely saturated with drainage and the resident's incontinence brief would be saturated with drainage as well. The facility did not change the dressing. She revealed that nurses working in the facility and the prior Director of Nursing (DON) stated that they could not change wound dressings . The hospice provider was coming daily to do dressing change until the slough came off the wound and drainage decreased to a more manageable level. The dressing changes were then decreased to Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. She revealed that on 02/17/25 at 8:30 A.M. she was told that a facility aide had changed Resident #85's dressing over the weekend. The dressing that was in place was not the dressing that she had placed on the resident on Friday and the hospice provider had not changed the dressing over the weekend. The RN stated she had tried everything to not remove the adherent slough, even wetting the dressing but it was stuck to the wound and when the dressing was removed, the slough was also removed. She revealed that she reported to the nurse on the unit that the aide had changed the dressing, and the slough was imbedded in the dressing and pulled out of the wound. Lastly, she said an aide had not changed the right hip dressing since the incident over the weekend of 02/15/25 and 02/16/25.

In an interview on 03/12/25 at 10:30 A.M. Hospice RN #300 revealed that she did not write a dressing order, for the facility to have approved by Resident #85's doctor, because she was told the facility could not change the dressing. Hospice RN#300 further revealed she was not given a reason as to why the facility could not do the dressing.

An observation made on 02/26/25 at 11:32 A.M. revealed Resident #85 was in the common area seated in her Broda chair and tilted to her left.

Review of Resident #85's medical record revealed a nurse's note dated 02/26/25, with no time indicated, that stated 11.5 cm length by 5 cm width by 0.5 cm depth with 1.5 cm long tunnel at one o'clock and 3 cm long tunnel at 5 o'clock.

Interview on 02/26/25 at 11:10 A.M. with Wellness Coordinator (WC) LPN #267 revealed she completed weekly skilled documentation, to determine if skilled residents were appropriate to remain in the assisted living, based on the resident's service plan and outside services they were receiving and if the facility can meet the resident's needs. If the resident met this criteria then they were appropriate to remain in the facility. WC LPN #267 verified she was completing the weekly assessment for skilled care for Resident #85 without having evaluated the resident's right hip pressure ulcer. She further revealed if a dressing needed to be changed during the night, when a nurse was not in the facility, it was her expectation that the caregivers would call the manager on call and the on-call manager would notify the Health and WD, who was always available to complete dressing changes and aides should not be changing dressings. She stated she had heard about the dressing change by an aide . She revealed that pressure area prevention should include encouraging residents to offload, encouraging repositioning and offering to assist with turning, offer pillows for positioning.

Interview on 02/26/25 at 12:27 P.M. with LPN #244 revealed if the caregivers found a red area she expected them to notify a nurse or the hospice provider if the resident is a hospice client. She further stated the resident should be assessed to see if they need frequent turning positioning with pillows or limited time out of bed. LPN #244 verified that she was notified by an outside provider that an aide in the facility changed a resident's wound dressing. She notified the ED and did verbal training with the facility aides she was working with to not change resident's dressings.

Interview on 02/26/25 at 2:50 P.M. with the ED confirmed it was reported to her that an aide had changed Resident #85's pressure ulcer dressing. She further stated that the aide had been disciplined for the incident.

Interview on 02/26/25 on 4:15 P.M. with Caregiver Assistant #268 confirmed she had changed Resident #85's dressing but was unable to recall the exact date this occurred but believed it was about eight days ago. She stated the dressing was coming off and Resident #85 was scratching at the dressing. She further stated she thought it was a band aid and that she was allowed to change it. She stated she used a dressing that was on the counter in Resident #85's room. She stated she was concerned about the size of the wound and called hospice about the wound but stated it was going to take them about an hour to get to the facility so she covered it to keep resident from scratching in the wound. She stated the hospice nurse did not do anything when they came in to the facility because the wound was covered.

Review of the email communication dated 02/16/25 revealed Hospice Provider #2 notified Hospice RN #300 that an aide had contacted hospice concerned about the appearance of a wound and the aide had already changed the dressing.

Record review revealed the facility failed to implement any additional nutritional interventions to promote healing until February 2025 when it was noted Ensure one carton three times a day to be provided by the resident's family .

In an interview on 03/12/25 at 3:33 P.M. the Wellness Coordinator verified there were no other nutritional interventions for Resident #85 other than what was added in February of 2025.

Review of the Employee file for Caregiver Assistant #268 revealed she was disciplined on 02/21/25, at the level of a final warning, for changing Resident #85's dressing. The discipline included the expected behavior of Caregiver Assistant #268 was to notify a nurse or hospice provider when a dressing need to be changed.

Review of the External Care Provider Agreement dated 02/13/23 revealed the facility nurse shall m

onitor services given by third party providers. He/she shall be notified if/when delegation of any nursing task is proposed.

Review of the facility procedure titled Decubitus (pressure ulcer) revised 10/2020 revealed the purpose was to recognize residents at risk, for the development of skin breakdown and institute measures for prevention.

Those at great risk were: immobile, incontinent, paralyzed and nutritionally compromised residents. Preventative action is essential for maintaining the skin integrity of these residents. The keystone to prevention is the education of the resident, family, caregivers and/or staff, since pressure sores may develop in a matter of hours.

Pressure relief devices that maintain low capillary closing pressure:

a.Low air-loss mattress/beds

b.Alternating pressure mattress

c.Gel type flotation pad.Thick foam mattresses

Skin Protectants/emollients and sprays:

a.Lotion

b.Ointment

c.Moisture Barrier creams.Permeable adhesive membrane dressings Comfort Aids: (do not relieve pressure, but aid in comfort)

a.Pillows

b.Sheepskin

c.Heel and elbow protectors.Lambs wool

Procedure

1.Keep the resident as active as possible. Use active and passive exercise, including range of motion. Physical therapy referral may be indicated.

2.Massage and stroke lightly along bony prominences to promote venous return, reduce edema, and increase vascular tone.

3.Avoid any pressure against a reddened area until normal color returns.

4.Keep skin clean, dry, soft and pliable by instituting good hygiene and using lotions or other skin emollients.

5.Protect bony prominences with pads, foams, pillows, sheepskin, specialized mattresses, and/or semi-permeable adhesive membrane dressings.

6.Inspect the skin regularly for evidence of pressure.

7.Initiate a regular, frequent, turning and repositioning schedule for residents who require it. Use all sides, if possible. A chart may assist staff.

8.Check pressure points on each occasion of turning, e.g., hops lower back, sacrum, shoulders, and heels. Observe for blanching or redness.

9.Avoid elevating the head of the bed (greater than 30 degrees) longer than necessary for procedures, feedings, etc, to reduce the damaging effects of shearing forces. Do not use elevating the head of the bed as a position change for resident. The resident especially at risk for the effects of shearing forces are those with paralysis, neuromuscular diseases, the very weak, the malnourished and the comatose.

10.Avoid placing the resident on a poorly ventilated mattress that is covered with plastic or other impermeable material.

11.Assure adequate nutrition, e.g., adequate protein, calories, vitamin C, iron and zinc. Use of the Nutrition Intervention Protocol may be used, if initiated by the nurse.

12.Assure adequate hydration

This violation represents non-compliance investigated under Complaint Number OH00162604 and OH00162869.

Rule
Ohio Administrative Code - residential care rules
R-0390Significant change in resident statusOhio citation · correction confirmed 07/11/2025
What the surveyor found

Based on record review, observation and interview the facility failed to provide appropriate care and intervention to assist a resident with meals and to prevent weight loss. This affected one resident (#76) of five reviewed for skilled services. The facility census was 88.

Findings include:

Review of Resident #76's medical record revealed a move in date of 03/07/20 and diagnoses including anxiety and seizures. Further review of Resident #76's medical record revealed she was a hospice client since 02/04/25. Review of Resident #76's facility service plan dated 02/21/25 revealed she required full assistance with bathing, grooming, dressing, oral care, toileting, medications and eating.

Review of Resident #76's recorded weights revealed a weight of 182.1 pounds on 09/02/24, a weight of 174.4 pounds on 10/07/24, a weight of 159.4 pounds on11/11/24, a weight of 157.6 pounds on 12/18/24, a weight of 147.4 pounds on 01/10/25 and a weight of 137.8 pounds on 02/09/25. Resident #76 lost a total of 44.3 pounds from 09/02/24 until 02/09/25. Review of facility weight records for the date range of 09/01/24 to 02/25/25 indicate Resident #76 had a 24.3% weight change in four months.

Review of Resident #76's resident assessment dated 02/14/25 revealed that under the section meals and nutrition Resident #76 was assessed to need full assistance with feeding and mealtime support. Further review revealed an additional note that indicated Resident #76 was able to feed herself after her meal was set up however she might become distracted and need encouragement to finish her meal and at times facility staff might have to assist her until her meal was complete.

Review of Resident#76's medical record revealed no assessment or evaluation by a registered dietician since 09/02/24.

In an interview on 02/24/25 at 9:30 AM Caregiver Assistant #227 revealed there are eight residents on the memory care unit that need full assistance with eating meals and further stated that she does not feel the residents are receiving assistance with their meals in a timely manner. Caregiver Assistant #227 revealed that often there are only two or three aides working on the memory care unit.

In an interview on 02/24/25 at 3.32 PM Hospice Registered Nurse (RN) #300 revealed Resident #76 was picked up by the hospice provider 02/04/25. Hospice RN #300 revealed Resident #76 had been experiencing weight loss and had a terminal diagnosis of cerebral ischemia. Hospice RN #300 revealed she place an order on Resident #76's chart on 02/21/25 that she was to be fed her meals by staff as Resident #76 does not eat on her own. Hospice RN #300 further revealed that until about two weeks ago facility staff were limiting Resident #76's fluids by not allowing her to have more when she drank what they had given her. Hospice RN #300 revealed the facility staff told her Resident #76 would not eat if they gave her more fluids.

In an interview on 02/25/25 at 8:58 A.M. Certified Caregiver #249 revealed there are seven to eight residents, on the memory care unit, who need full assistance with eating their meals and another three to four residents who need to be prompted to eat and then assisted to finish their meals. Certified Caregiver #249 revealed they only give Resident #76 small amounts of fluid at a time because she will fall asleep while holding her cup and spill it on herself if the cup is full.

In an interview on 02/25/25 at 9:16 A.M. Caregiver Assistant #229 revealed Resident #76 drinks fluids well but does not eat well and at times will eat better if there are not a lot of people around to distract her. Caregiver Assistant #229 not sure where to record meal and fluid intakes for the residents on the memory care unit and stated that while she remembered doing so in the past she did not think they recorded them now.

In an interview on 02/25/25 at 4:15 P.M. the Executive Director (ED) confirmed the facility does not record food or fluid intakes for residents. The ED indicated this was the residents' home and people did not normally record their food or fluid intakes in their homes.

On 02/26/25 at 1:40 P.M. a call was placed to the facility dietician and a message was left requesting a return call.

In an interview on 02/26/25 at 2:40 P.M. the Ed revealed the Dietician only comes into the facility every six months and if they need the dietician to review a resident, in between those times, they can call for an earlier visit. The ED confirmed that they did not call to have Resident #76 reviewed. The ED stated That Resident #76 had gained quite a bit of weight when she was first admitted and though she was losing weight they were not concerned because she was returning to her more normal weight range.

In an interview on 02/26/25 at 4:20 P.M. Resident #76's daughter revealed she was aware of her mother's weight loss seeing it on her weekly visits and had noticed that she was eating less but did not realize how much weight she had lost.

An observation on 02/24/25 at 12:33 P.M. of the lunch meal revealed Resident #76 seated at a dining room table in a Broda Chair with her plate of food in front of her. Resident #76 made no attempt to eat at this time. Facility staff were assisting other residents to eat at the time of the observation. Staff stated Resident #76 had eaten about 25% of her meal before the surveyor arrived on the unit and refused to consume more.

An observation on 02/25/25 at 8:38 A.M. of the breakfast meal revealed Resident #76 seated at a dining room table in a Broda Chair with her plate of food in front of her. Resident #76 was drinking from a coffee mug with a small amount of juice in it and made no attempt to eat at this time. Facility staff were assisting other residents to eat at the time of the observation. Staff assisted Resident #76 with her meal after rewarming it in the microwave. Resident #76 consumed about 60% of her meal.

An observation on 02/25/25 at 1:05 P.M. of the lunch meal revealed Resident #76 seated at a dining room table in a Broda Chair with her plate of food in front of her. Facility staff were assisting Resident #76 with her meal at the time of the observation. Resident #76 finished her meal with assistance consuming 100% of the meal.

The facility did not have a policy for weights at the time of the survey.

This violation represents non-compliance investigated under Complaint Number OH00162871.

Rule
Ohio Administrative Code - residential care rules
December 16, 2024Complaint survey1 deficiency
R-0700Annual review of policiesOhio citation · correction confirmed 07/11/2025
What the surveyor found

Based on medical record review, resident financial record review, staff interview, and facility procedure review, the facility failed to follow their procedures to issue a financial refund in a timely manner. This affected two residents (#101 and #102) of three resident financial records reviewed. The census was 93.

Findings Include:

1. Resident #101 was to be admitted to the facility on 09/04/24, but she was never formally admitted to the facility.

Review of Resident #101 financial statement, dated 12/01/24, revealed she had a beginning balance of $3,840.00 to be refunded to Resident #101 and/or family. According to this document, this balance due was between 45 and 120 days old. There was no date on the form as to when the money was initially paid to the facility.

2. Resident #102 was admitted to the facility on 07/09/24. Her diagnoses included dementia and Parkinson's disease. Review of her assisted living assessment, dated 08/05/24, revealed she had no cognitive impairment. She was discharged from the facility on 08/15/24 to her home.

Review of Resident #102 current financial statement, with a bill due date on 01/01/25, revealed as of 08/31/24, she had a balance of $7,991.76 to be refunded to Resident #102 and/or family. According to this document, a refund was issued on 10/24/24 for the amount of $7,942.40, which left a balance of $49.36 to still be refunded. Then, on 11/01/24, the refund was reversed and the $7,942.40 was placed back into her facility financial account, making the total to be refunded back to $7,991.76. On 11/08/24, another refund was issued for $7,942.30. Finally, on 11/27/24, the last refund for the remaining $49.36 was issued, creating a zero balance remaining in Resident #102 financial account.

Interview with Corporate Business Office Manager #101 on 12/16/24 at 1:43 P.M. confirmed the facility is to refund any overages to the resident/representative within 60 days. She stated they will typically wait until the next billing cycle has been completed, to ensure the resident doesn't owe any more money, and then they will issue a check. She confirmed they had not issued a check to Resident #101 and/or representative, even though the resident never admitted to the facility; this was the deposit for the room. Also, she confirmed it was over 60 days when they issued the first check to Resident #102 representative; she was discharged from the facility on 08/15/24 and the first check was not issued until 10/24/24. She confirmed the entire amount that Resident #102 was owed, was sent to Resident #102 representative and the checks have cleared.

Interview with Executive Director on 12/16/24 at 1:25 P.M. and 3:15 P.M. confirmed the refunded money to residents and/or representatives should be issued within 60 days of their discharge date. This includes residents who have paid for a room, but never actually move in and should be afforded a refund. She confirmed they are not able to locate a specific refund policy

Rule
Ohio Administrative Code - residential care rules
December 12, 2023Licensure survey3 deficiencies
R-0559Procure, store, prepare, distribute and serve foodsOhio citation · correction confirmed 07/11/2025
What the surveyor found

Based on observation, interview and policy review the facility failed to maintain a clean and sanitary kitchen and failed to label and store food appropriately. This had the potential to affect 67 of 67 residents who consumed food from the kitchen. The facility census was 67.

Findings include:

1. Observation of the kitchen on 12/12/23 at 9:05 A.M. and 11:30 A.M. revealed two large bins containing open bags of flour and sugar respectively. The bags and containers were not labeled with an open or use by date. Additionally, the flour was observed to have a scoop in it.

Interview on 12/12/23 at 11:30 A.M. with Cook #110 verified the above observation.

Review of the policy titled Food Storage-Labeling and Dating dated March 2017 revealed all dates were to be written on the container and represent the date it was opened or prepared.

2. Observation on 12/12/23 at 9:05 A.M. and 11:30 A.M. of the kitchen griddle revealed a greasy black substance running down the sides of and to the floor. This substance covered the shelf below the griddle and was observed on the fryer next to it.

Interview on 12/12/23 at 11:30 A.M. with Cook #110 verified the observation, she reported she planned on cleaning the top of the griddle that day but not the rest of it.

This violation is a recite to the survey dated 08/29/22.

Rule
Ohio Administrative Code - residential care rules
R-0614Notify director when normal business interruption due to emergency/disasterOhio citation · correction confirmed 07/11/2025
What the surveyor found

Based on record review and interview the facility failed to complete fire drills on night shift every three months and failed to ensure residents capable of self-evacuation were actually evacuated to safe areas or to the exterior of the residential care facility in at least two fire drills a year on each shift as required. This had the potential to affect all 67 residents residing in the facility. The facility census was 67.

Findings include:

Review of the fire drill records for drills completed on 12/31/22, 01/19/23, 02/28/23, 03/28/23, 04/27/23, 05/23/23, 06/23/23, 07/12/23, 08/30/23, 09/21/23, 10/31/23, and 11/21/23 revealed no evidence residents capable of self-evacuation were actually evacuated to safe areas or to the exterior of the residential care facility in at least two fire drills a year on each shift.

In addition, review of the fire drill records revealed no evidence drills were conducted during the night shift at least once every three months. Night shift drills were conducted on 01/19/23, 04/27/23, and 08/30/23.

Interview on 12/12/23 at 1:25 P.M. with the Executive Director (ED) verified the facility had evidence residents capable of self-evacuation were actually evacuated to safe areas or to the exterior of the residential care facility in at least two fire drills a year on each shift and verified fire drills were not conducted on third shift at least once every three months in 2023 as required.

This violation is a recite to the survey dated 08/29/22.

Rule
Ohio Administrative Code - residential care rules
R-0661Maintain clean environment; housekeeping, garbage, rodentsOhio citation · correction confirmed 07/11/2025
What the surveyor found

Based on observation and interview the facility failed to maintain the memory care dining room in a clean and homelike manner. This had the potential to affect 15 of 15 residents who resided on the facility memory care unit. The facility census was 67.

Findings include:

Observation of the memory care kitchen and dining room on 12/12/23 at 10:20 A.M. and 2:56 P.M. revealed food splatters along the kitchen walls, along the walls that extended from the kitchen to the end of the dining room, and the third dining room wall. The splatters were observed in multiple areas including high on the wall and down by the floor.

Observation of the memory care kitchen and dining room on 12/12/23 at 10:20 A.M. and 2:56 P.M. revealed the laminate flooring in the dining room was broken in three spots. These three spots were of varying size but each were larger than the size of a baseball and the floor beneath was exposed.

Observation of the memory care kitchen and dining room on 12/12/23 at 10:20 A.M. and 2:56 P.M. the transition strip from the dining room laminate floor to the hallway carpet was missing in multiple spots. The transition strip had been covering a raised metal strip that could be seen throughout most of the transition between the dining room and the hallway.

Interview on 12/12/23 at 2:56 P.M. with Nursing Assistant #114 verified the walls had food splatters on them, she reported she had not seen housekeeping clean the walls. Nursing Assistant #114 reported the nursing assistants also participated in keeping the dining room clean, however, they cleaned the floor and the tables. She additionally verified the broken laminate flooring. Nursing Assistant #114 reported she had noted the missing and broken transition strip and stated it was a tripping hazard.

This violation is a recite to the survey dated 08/29/22.

Rule
Ohio Administrative Code - residential care rules
August 28, 2023Complaint survey · listed in Ohio's index; no findings report publishedNo deficiencies
No deficiencies cited
Ohio lists this visit in its inspection index with no deficiencies. The state publishes a findings report only when a visit cites something, so there is no further detail to show.
December 7, 2022Complaint survey1 deficiency
R-0391Resident incidents and log; identify resident upon requestOhio citation · correction confirmed 12/12/2023
What the surveyor found

Based on medical record review, staff interview, and facility fall policy, this facility failed to ensure effective fall interventions were implemented to prevent Resident #4 from frequent falls. This affected one (Resident #4) of the five residents reviewed for falls. The facility census was 82.

Findings include:

Review of the medical record for Resident #4 revealed an admission date of 07/12/22. Diagnosis included fracture of part of the right femur, falls, muscle weakness, mild protein calorie malnutrition, age related osteoporosis, and presence of a right artificial hip joint.

Review of Resident #4's Service Plan Assessment dated 09/19/22 revealed Resident #4 required staff escort via wheelchair to meals and activities. Resident #4 required staff assistance with dressing, grooming, toileting, and personal hygiene. Resident #4 required nightly safety checks once a night around 12:00 A.M. and 2:00 A.M.

Review of Resident #4's Nursing Assessment dated 09/19/22 revealed the resident was noted to experience trouble with her right arm due to have a history of a stroke with some weakness. Resident #4 needed assistance with dressing and required a neck brace due to have a fractured C2. Resident #4 had a history of a fall with a total hip replacement and would need assistance with dressing lower extremities. Resident #4 received physical therapy due to poor balance. Resident #4 was noted to experience incontinence of bladder function and would use call light when assistance with toileting is needed but will attempt to transfer self if staff do not respond fast enough. Resident #4 required staff assistance with locomotion to meals and activities with the assistance of a wheelchair for mobility.

Review of Resident #4's Fall Risk Assessment dated 09/19/22 revealed a score of 17 indicating the resident was a high risk for falls.

Review of Resident #4's medical record revealed a Managed Risk Assessment dated 09/24/22 signed by the facility and Resident #4. Issue of concern was that Resident #4 was noted to have multiple falls with and without injury, getting up on her own, and not waiting for staff assistance.

Review of facility's incident/accident log from 09/01/22 through 11/28/22 revealed Resident #4 had 25 witnessed and unwitnessed falls. Of the 25 falls, new and repeated interventions were used, and the interventions were shown to be ineffective as the resident continued to experience multiple falls:

On 09/01/22 between 8:00 A.M. and 9:00 A.M., unwitnessed fall in own room, complains of pain to the neck. Hospitalized and expected to transfer to a long-term care facility. Resident was sent to the hospital, noted to have a fracture of the C2, going to rehab for a few weeks.

On 09/21/22 between 5:01 P.M. and 6:00 P.M., unwitnessed fall in own room, minor skin injury to right upper extremity. Resident was noted to sign up to receive Hospice Services.

On 09/24/22 between 6:01 P.M. and 7:00 P.M., unwitnessed fall in own room with bleeding noted to the right upper extremity.

On 09/26/22 between 12:01 A.M. and 1:00 A.M. unwitnessed fall in own room with minor skin tear to right upper extremity.

On 09/27/22 between 12:01 A.M. and 1:00 A.M. unwitnessed fall in own room with minor skin tear to left upper extremity.

On 10/05/22 between 2:01 A.M. and 3:00 P.M. unwitnessed fall in own room with minor skin injury to right upper extremities.

On 10/05/22 between 2:01 P.M. and 3:00 P.M. unwitnessed fall in own room with minor skin injury to head.

On 10/09/22 between 5:01 P.M. and 6:00 P.M. witnessed fall in Bistro with no apparent injuries noted.

On 10/10/22 between 2:01 P.M. and 3:00 P.M. unwitnessed fall in own room with bleeding noted to the head.

On 10/20/22 between 10:01 A.M. and 11:00 A.M. unwitnessed fall in own room with no apparent injury noted.

On 10/25/22 between 6:01 P.M. and 7:00 P.M. unwitnessed fall in own room with no apparent injury noted.

On 10/30/22 between 2:01 P.M. and 3:00 P.M. unwitnessed fall in own room with no apparent injury noted.

On 11/06/22 between 4:01 P.M. and 5:00 P.M. unwitnessed fall in own room with no apparent injury noted.

On 11/07/22 between 9:01 A.M. and 10:00 A.M. unwitnessed fall in own room with pain noted to the right hip.

On 11/07/22 between12:01 P.M. and 1:00 P.M. fall in own room with minor skin injury to right upper extremity.

On 11/07/22 between 6:01 P.M. and 7:00 P.M. unwitnessed fall in own room with pain in rib.

On 11/10/22 between 5:01 P.M. and 6:00 P.M. unwitnessed fall in own room with no apparent injury noted.

On 11/13/22 between 2:01 P.M. and 3:00 P.M. unwitnessed fall in own room with no apparent injury noted.

On 11/16/22 between 6:01 A.M. and 7:00 A.M. unwitnessed fall in own room with no apparent injury noted.

On 11/21/22 between 6:01 A.M. and 7:00 A.M. unwitnessed fall in own room with a minor skin injury to the right knee.

On 11/22/22 between 8:01 P.M. and 9:00 P.M. unwitnessed fall in own room with no apparent injury noted.

On 11/23/22 between 8:01 A.M. and 9:00 A.M. unwitnessed fall in own room with pain to the right hip.

On 11/23/22 between 1:01 P.M. and 2:00 P.M. unwitnessed fall in own room with pain to hip.

On 11/24/22 between 10:01 A.M. and 11:00 A.M. unwitnessed fall in own room with bleeding noted to head. The resident was sent to the emergency room for evaluation and to get sutures to head.

On 11/28/22 between 11:01 A.M. and 12:00 P.M. unwitnessed fall in own room with pain to the right hip.

Interview on 12/05/22 at 4:00 P.M. with the Executive Director revealed Resident #4 had experienced multiple falls while residing at the facility. Multiple fall interventions had been implemented including staff monitoring, reeducation on the use of call lights, ensuring proper footwear was in place, and bed in the lowest position. Resident #4 continued to experience falls due to being impulsive with her actions and most of the time, Resident #4 would not use her call light but try to get up by herself. A Risk Management Agreement was completed between the resident and the facility regarding the residents' multiple falls.

Review of facility's policy titled Incident and Accident Report

Rule
Ohio Administrative Code - residential care rules
August 29, 2022Licensure survey5 deficiencies
R-0559Procure, store, prepare, distribute and serve foodsOhio citation · correction confirmed 07/11/2025
What the surveyor found

Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure opened food was stored in a manner to protect against contamination and spoilage. This had the potential to affect all 85 residents residing in the facility.

Findings Included:

Observation on 08/29/22 at 9:11 A.M. during the initial tour of the dietary department revealed the reach in refrigerator had an opened bag of mozzarella cheese, blue cheese, and parmesan cheese opened and undated. Eight eggs were also noted in a silver container uncovered with no way of determining if the eggs were raw or cooked. Dietary Aide #155 verified the food was opened and undated leaving the staff unable to identify how long the food had been opened.

Observation on 08/29/22 at 9:15 A.M. of the walk in refrigerator revealed opened and undated heavy whipping cream, beef paste, vegetable paste, chicken paste, half and half, cottage cheese, flat bread and tostito shells.

Observation on 08/29/22 at 9:26 A.M. observation of the facility's dry food revealed a package of opened and undated spaghetti, powdered sugar. Further review revealed a bag of opened brown rice sitting on the bottom shelf with a mouse trap sitting on the floor beside the shelf.

Interview on 08/29/22 at 9:29 A.M. with Dietary Aides #147 and #148 verified the food was unopened and undated. The Dietary Aides also verified pests had access to the opened bag of brown rice.

Rule
Ohio Administrative Code - residential care rules
R-0614Notify director when normal business interruption due to emergency/disasterOhio citation · correction confirmed 07/11/2025
What the surveyor found

Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to conduct a fire drill on each shift for each quarter. This had the potential to affect all 85 residents residing in the facility.

Findings Included:

Review of the facility's fire drills from 07/21 to 08/22 revealed the facility failed to conduct twelve fire drills, one on each shift at least every three months. Further review revealed the only documented fire drill the facility could provide was conducted in March 2022.

Interview on 08/29/22 at 4:20 P.M. with the Maintenance Director #108 verified the facility had not conducted twelve fire drills, one on each shift at least every three months.

Rule
Ohio Administrative Code - residential care rules
R-0624Train all residents in fire drillsOhio citation · correction confirmed 12/12/2023
What the surveyor found

Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to conduct a monthly fire safety inspection. This had the potential to affect all 85 residents residing in the facility.

Findings Included:

Review of the facility's self-inspection form 07/01/22 to 08/29/22 revealed the facility failed to conduct a monthly fire safety inspection for the month of November 2021 and December 2021.

Interview on 08/29/22 at 4:20 P.M. with Maintenance Director #108 verified the monthly fire safety inspection for the months of November and December of 2021.

Rule
Ohio Administrative Code - residential care rules
R-0660Maintain heating, electrical, bldg services; central heating check Q2 yearsOhio citation · correction confirmed 12/12/2023
What the surveyor found

Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the facility's central heating system was inspected every two years. This had the potential to affect all 85 residents residing in the facility.

Findings Included:

Review of the last heating and cooling inspection provided by the facility revealed the central heating system had not been inspected since 2019.

Interview on 08/29/22 at 1:20 P.M. with the Executive Director (ED) verified the facility's central heating system had not been inspected since 2019.

Rule
Ohio Administrative Code - residential care rules
R-0661Maintain clean environment; housekeeping, garbage, rodentsOhio citation · correction confirmed 07/11/2025
What the surveyor found

Based on observation and interviews, the facility failed to provide a clean, sanitary, and well-maintained environment for residents. This directly affected four residents (#18, #32, #69 and #78), who had carpets with large stains. Further observation revealed the common areas carpet had large stains. This had the potential to affect all 85 residents residing in the facility.

Findings Included:

Observation on 08/29/22 at 9:30 A.M. revealed the activity/dining area had several large in size stains that had the appearance of being old.

Observation on 08/29/22 at 9:36 A.M. revealed Resident #18's room carpet had multiple large in size stains in various colors that were old in appearance. Interview with Resident #18 during the time of the observation revealed she had asked several times for the carpet to be shampooed.

Observation on 08/29/22 at 10:00 A.M. revealed Resident #32's carpet was heavily stained with various sizes that were old in appearance.

Observation on 08/29/22 at 10:40 A.M. revealed the D hallway carpet was heavily stained throughout the unit in various sizes that were old in appearance.

Observation on 08/29/22 at 10:08 A.M. revealed Resident #78's carpeting had several large sized stains that had the appearance of being old.

Observation on 08/29/22 at 10:15 A.M. revealed Resident #69's carpeting had several large sized stains that had the appearance of being old.

Interview on 08/29/22 at 1:20 P.M. with the Executive Director (ED) revealed the facility contracts a carpet cleaning company and they alternate areas of the building on their monthly visits. The ED revealed the Maintenance Director did spot cleaning of the resident's carpet as needed. The ED verified the carpets were soiled and the stains appeared old.

Rule
Ohio Administrative Code - residential care rules