Citations in Florida
Comprehensive analysis of citations, statistics, and compliance trends for long-term care facilities in Florida.
Statistics for Florida (Last 12 Months)
Financial Impact (Last 12 Months)
Latest Citations in Florida
Surveyors found that the facility’s only commercial cooking hood was not maintained in accordance with NFPA 101 and NFPA 96 requirements. During a kitchen tour with the Maintenance Director, the hood was observed to be not grease tight due to missing fire-resistant caulk, and the Maintenance Director acknowledged this condition at the time of the survey.
Surveyors found that the facility failed to comply with NFPA 99, NFPA 70, and NFPA 1 requirements for electrical equipment when, during a tour with the Maintenance Director, a power strip in the electrical room was observed being used as a permanent power source instead of a dedicated receptacle. The report states that this improper use of a relocatable power tap could lead to electrical hazards for residents and staff, and notes that extension cords and power strips are not to be used as substitutes for fixed wiring under the cited codes.
Surveyors found that the facility did not have documentation showing completion of the required annual 90‑minute test of emergency lighting. During record review and interview, the Director of Facilities confirmed that records of this annual test, required under NFPA 101 sections 19.2.9.1 and 7.9, were not available. This deficiency was cited as affecting all occupants in the event of a fire or other emergency.
Surveyors found that the facility failed to perform and/or document the required annual Duct Detector Differential testing for the fire alarm system in accordance with NFPA 101, NFPA 70, and NFPA 72. During record review and interviews with the Director of Facilities, no documentation could be produced to show that this annual testing had been completed, and the Director acknowledged the lack of records. This deficiency was cited as potentially affecting all occupants in the event of a fire or other emergency.
Surveyors found that the facility failed to perform and/or document required annual testing and exercising of main and feeder circuit breakers in accordance with NFPA 99 and manufacturer recommendations. During record review, no documentation could be produced to show that the annual breaker exercises had been completed, and the Director of Facilities acknowledged this lack of records. This deficiency relates to the essential electrical system that supports life safety and critical branches during emergencies.
Surveyors observed that an adapter was used to power a refrigerator in the kitchen and a refrigerator in the dining room manager's office was plugged into a power strip. The Director of Facilities confirmed both uses, which did not comply with NFPA 99 and NFPA 70 requirements prohibiting adapters and power strips from being used as substitutes for permanent wiring.
Surveyors found that food service operations failed to meet professional food safety standards in both the main and satellite kitchens. In the main kitchen, a cook’s facial hair was not fully covered, the handwashing sink did not initially provide warm water, wet-nested pans and dirty plate domes were stored for use, ice buckets were stained with mold-like discoloration, and the high-temp dishwasher failed to reach the required sanitizing temperature. In the satellite pantry, the dishwasher did not reach required wash temperatures, vents and cabinets above serving dishes had mold-like buildup and residue, floors were damaged and soiled, the dishwasher chemical cabinet was rusted, the AC filter was heavily soiled, the juice dispenser had debris near clean cups, and tray carts contained dirty sheet trays. During tray line observation, salad items were held above 41°F, and a pureed vegetable listed on the menu extension was not available on the line.
Two residents on physician-ordered modified diets (pureed and mechanical soft with nectar-thick liquids) were given Regular Menus listing items such as fresh fruit, salad greens, and grilled cheese that were not compatible with their diet orders. Both residents selected items from these Regular Menus, but the facility either could not provide the chosen foods due to diet restrictions or substituted different items (e.g., canned peach halves instead of fresh fruit), despite the residents’ expressed preferences. The RD and dietetic technician confirmed that Regular Menus were routinely provided to all residents, including those on mechanically altered diets, leading to menu choices that did not align with ordered diet consistencies.
Surveyors found that the facility did not follow physician-ordered therapeutic diets or provide prescribed Magic Cup nutritional supplements for several cognitively impaired residents. A resident on a pureed diet with honey-thick liquids was served a lunch without the ordered pureed vegetable, and tray line review on another day showed no pureed vegetables available despite the menu specifying them. Multiple residents with orders for Magic Cup supplements had these listed on their meal tickets but were instead served other desserts or received no supplement at all, while documentation on the MAR indicated full consumption. Dietary staff acknowledged responsibility for providing Magic Cups but could not explain why residents in the dining room did not receive them.
A resident with intact cognition and multiple cardiac and pulmonary diagnoses had clearly documented DNR orders, including signed advance directive forms and care plan entries confirming her wish to avoid resuscitation. During a cardiac emergency, a CNA found the resident unresponsive and notified an RN, who initiated a code blue response. Several RNs and LPNs transferred the resident to bed and began CPR without first verifying code status, despite one LPN asking and then leaving the room to check the record. Staff interviews and video review showed that chest compressions and use of a bag-valve mask continued for about 12 minutes until EMS arrived, even after staff learned the resident was DNR, and the physician confirmed the resident was already listed as DNR in the system, leading to an Immediate Jeopardy finding for failure to honor advance directives.
Commercial Cooking Hood Not Maintained Grease Tight per NFPA Standards
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors identified a deficiency involving the facility’s commercial cooking facilities. During a tour of the kitchen between 1:00 p.m. and 3:00 p.m. with the Maintenance Director, surveyors observed that the one commercial cooking hood in use was not grease tight. Specifically, the hood was missing required fire-resistant caulk, which is necessary for maintaining a grease-tight seal in accordance with NFPA 96 and NFPA 101 standards. The Maintenance Director acknowledged these findings at the time of observation. The deficiency was cited under NFPA 101 and NFPA 96 requirements for commercial cooking operations, which mandate that cooking equipment and associated hoods be protected and maintained in compliance with these fire and life safety codes.
Plan Of Correction
Preparation and/or execution of this plan does not constitute admission or agreement by the provider of the truth of the facts alleged or conclusions set forth on the statement of deficiencies. This plan of correction is prepared and/or executed solely because required. What corrective action(s) will be accomplished for those residents found to have been affected by the deficient practice? No residents were affected by this deficient practice. How you will identify other residents having potential to be affected by the same practice and what corrective actions will be taken; Commercial cooking hood system inspected; no additional deficient areas were identified. What measures will be put into place or what systematic changes will you make to ensure that the practice does not recur:Maintenance staff and Dietary staff education on proper use and reporting of issues related to cooking hood system.Verification of scheduled inspections and cleaning of cooking hood system by licensed vendor.How the corrective action(s) will be monitored to ensure the practice will not recur, i.e., what quality assurance program will be put in place:The maintenance director/designee will complete weekly audits of cooking hood system for 4 weeks, then monthly for 2 months to ensure compliance. The findings will be reported to the Quality Assurance Performance Improvement Committee for ongoing compliance. Preparation and/or execution of this plan does not constitute admission or agreement by the provider of the truth of the facts alleged or conclusions set forth on the statement of deficiencies. This plan of correction is prepared and/or executed solely because required. What corrective action(s) will be accomplished for those residents found to have been affected by the deficient practice? No residents were affected by this deficient practice. How you will identify other residents having potential to be affected by the same practice and what corrective actions will be taken; Commercial cooking hood system inspected; no additional deficient areas were identified. What measures will be put into place or what systematic changes will you make to ensure that the practice does not recur; Maintenance staff and Dietary staff education on proper use and reporting of issues related to cooking hood system. Verification of scheduled inspections and cleaning of cooking hood system by licensed vendor. How the corrective action(s) will be monitored to ensure the practice will not recur, i.e., what quality assurance program will be put in place; The maintenance director/designee will complete weekly audits of cooking hood system for 4 weeks, then monthly for 2 months to ensure compliance. The findings will be reported to the Quality Assurance Performance Improvement Committee for ongoing compliance.
Improper Use of Power Strip as Permanent Power Source in Electrical Room
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors identified a deficiency related to improper use of relocatable power taps (RPTs) and power strips in violation of NFPA 99, NFPA 70, and NFPA 1 requirements. During a facility tour conducted between 10:00 a.m. and 12:00 p.m. with the Maintenance Director, surveyors observed one power strip in the electrical room being used as a source of permanent power instead of being connected to a dedicated receptacle. The report notes that this use did not comply with standards that require extension cords and power strips not be used as a substitute for fixed wiring and that they be used only under specified conditions. The deficiency specifically concerns the facility’s failure to ensure that RPTs are maintained and used in accordance with NFPA 99 (2012 Edition) sections 10.2.3.6 and 10.2.4, and NFPA 70 (2011 and 2020 Editions) provisions governing flexible cords and temporary wiring, as well as NFPA 1 (2021 Edition) sections 11.1.2.2, 11.1.4.1, and 1.4.1. The report states that this condition could lead to electric hazards for residents and staff. No individual resident cases, medical histories, or specific clinical conditions are described in connection with this deficiency.
Plan Of Correction
What corrective action(s) will be accomplished for those residents found to have been affected by the deficient practice? No residents were affected by this deficient practice. How you will identify other residents having potential to be affected by the same practice and what corrective actions will be taken; Facility wide audit of electrical rooms was conducted to identify improper use of power strips. No additional concerns were identified. What measures will be put into place or what systematic changes you will make to ensure that the practice does not recur; The facility completed education reinforcing compliance with electrical safety requirements in accordance with National Fire Protection Association. How the corrective action(s) will be monitored to ensure the practice will not recur, i.e., what quality assurance program will be put in place: The maintenance director/designee will complete random electrical safety audits 2 times per week for 4 weeks, then monthly to ensure compliance with electrical safety standards. The findings will be reported to the Quality Assurance Performance Improvement Committee for ongoing compliance. What corrective action(s) will be accomplished for those residents found to have been affected by the deficient practice? No residents were affected by this deficient practice. How you will identify other residents having potential to be affected by the same practice and what corrective actions will be taken; Facility wide audit of electrical rooms was conducted to identify improper use of power strips. No additional concerns were identified. What measures will be put into place or what systematic changes you will make to ensure that the practice does not recur; The facility completed education reinforcing compliance with electrical safety requirements in accordance with National Fire Protection Association. How the corrective action(s) will be monitored to ensure the practice will not recur, i.e., what quality assurance program will be put in place; The maintenance director/designee will complete random electrical safety audits 2 times per week for 4 weeks, then monthly to ensure compliance with electrical safety standards. The findings will be reported to the Quality Assurance Performance Improvement Committee for ongoing compliance.
Failure to Document Required Annual 90‑Minute Emergency Lighting Test
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors identified a deficiency related to emergency lighting when, during record review and staff interview between 11:30 AM and 3:00 PM with the Director of Facilities, the facility was unable to provide documentation that the required annual 90‑minute testing of emergency lighting had been performed. The Director of Facilities acknowledged that there was no documentation available to show completion of this annual 90‑minute emergency lighting test, as required by NFPA 101 (2012 and 2021 editions), sections 19.2.9.1 and 7.9. This failure to document the annual emergency lighting test was cited as a noncompliance that could affect all occupants of the facility in the event of a fire or other emergency. No specific residents, medical histories, or clinical conditions were mentioned in the report; the deficiency pertains to facility-wide life safety systems and their required testing and documentation.
Plan Of Correction
Emergency Lighting CFR(s): NFPA 101 Preparation and/or execution of this plan does not constitute admission or agreement by the provider that a deficiency exists. This response is also not to be construed as an admission of fault by the facility, its employees, agents or other individuals who draft or may be discussed in this response and plan of correction. This plan of correction is submitted as the facility's credible allegation of compliance and Soley because it is required Emergency Lighting K0291 The facility immediately conducted a comprehensive inspection of all emergency lighting systems. On The Director of Facilities performed the required 90-minute annual testing of all emergency lighting units. Documentation of testing has been completed and is maintained on-site. 2. All areas of the facility were considered at risk due to lack of documented annual testing. A full facility-wide audit of all emergency lighting units was completed on by the Director of Facilities to ensure compliance. 3. The facility implemented a preventative maintenance schedule to ensure annual 90-minute emergency lighting testing is completed in accordance with NFPA 101 (2012), Section 7.9. A log tracking system has been developed to document all required testing. The Director of Facilities/designee will receive re-education on Life Safety Code requirements and documentation standards. 4. The Director of Facilities will review fire alarm testing records quarterly for 12 months, will present the findings for 12 months at Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) meetings to confirm inspections have taken place. During and at the conclusion of the twelve months, the QAPI committee will re-evaluate and initiate necessary action or extend the review period. The Administrator is responsible for confirming implementation and ongoing compliance with the components of the Plan of Correction, and resolving variances that may occur. The Administrator is responsible for confirming the status of this Plan of Correction is reviewed and discussed at QAPI meetings and action initiated if required. Emergency Lighting CFR(s): NFPA 101 Preparation and/or execution of this plan does not constitute admission or agreement by the provider that a deficiency exists. This response is also not to be construed as an admission of fault by the facility, its employees, agents or other individuals who draft or may be discussed in this response and plan of correction. This plan of correction is submitted as the facility's credible allegation of compliance and Soley because it is required Emergency Lighting K0291 The facility immediately conducted a comprehensive inspection of all emergency lighting systems. On The Director of Facilities performed the required 90-minute annual testing of all emergency lighting units. Documentation of testing has been completed and is maintained on-site. 2. All areas of the facility were considered at risk due to lack of documented annual testing. A full facility-wide audit of all emergency lighting units was completed on by the Director of Facilities to ensure compliance. 3. The facility implemented a preventative maintenance schedule to ensure annual 90-minute emergency lighting testing is completed in accordance with NFPA 101 (2012), Section 7.9. A log tracking system has been developed to document all required testing. The Director of Facilities/designee will receive re-education on Life Safety Code requirements and documentation standards. 4. The Director of Facilities will review fire alarm testing records quarterly for 12 months, will present the findings for 12 months at Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) meetings to confirm inspections have taken place. During and at the conclusion of the twelve months, the QAPI committee will re-evaluate and initiate necessary action or extend the review period. The Administrator is responsible for confirming implementation and ongoing compliance with the components of the Plan of Correction, and resolving variances that may occur. The Administrator is responsible for confirming the status of this Plan of Correction is reviewed and discussed at QAPI meetings and action initiated if required.
Failure to Perform and Document Annual Duct Detector Differential Testing
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors identified a deficiency related to the facility’s fire alarm system testing and maintenance, specifically the required annual Duct Detector Differential testing. During record review conducted between 11:30 AM and 3:00 PM, surveyors requested documentation demonstrating that this annual testing had been completed in accordance with NFPA 101 (2012 and 2021 editions), NFPA 70, and NFPA 72. The facility was unable to produce records showing that the Duct Detector Differential testing had been performed as required. In an interview conducted during the same time frame, the Director of Facilities acknowledged that the facility failed to provide documentation of the annual Duct Detector Differential testing. The deficiency was cited under NFPA 101 2012 (19.2.9.1, 7.9) and NFPA 101 2021 (19.2.9.1, 7.9), indicating noncompliance with the standards that require fire alarm detection systems, including duct detectors, to be tested and maintained annually. The report notes that this deficiency could affect all occupants of the facility in the event of a fire or other emergency.
Plan Of Correction
Fire Alarm System - Testing and Maintenance CFR(s): NFPA 101 Preparation and/or execution of this plan does not constitute admission or agreement by the provider that a deficiency exists. This response is also not to be construed as an admission of fault by the facility, its employees, agents or other individuals who draft or may be discussed in this response and plan of correction. This plan of correction is submitted as the facility's credible allegation of compliance and Soley because it is required Fire Alarm System - Testing and Maintenance K0345 1. On The facility a certified fire alarm vendor to perform annual duct detector differential testing. All required testing has now been completed and documented. 2. All residents and staff were considered at risk due to lack of documented testing. A facility-wide review of all fire alarm components was conducted on 3. The facility established a service agreement to ensure all fire alarm testing (including duct detectors) is completed annually per NFPA 72 and NFPA 101 requirements. A compliance calendar has been implemented with alerts for required inspections and testing. The Director of Facilities/designee has been re-educated on required testing intervals and documentation. 4. The Director of Facilities or designee will audit for 3 months all documentation for the annual testing and inspection of the duct detector pressure differential test. The Director of Facilities will present the findings of site inspections for 3 months at Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) meetings to confirm inspections have taken place. During and at the conclusion of the three months, the QAPI committee will re-evaluate and initiate necessary action or extend the review period. The Administrator is responsible for confirming implementation and ongoing compliance with the components of the Plan of Correction, and resolving variances that may occur. The Administrator is responsible for confirming the status of this Plan of Correction is reviewed and discussed at QAPI meetings and action initiated if required Fire Alarm System - Testing and Maintenance CFR(s): NFPA 101 Preparation and/or execution of this plan does not constitute admission or agreement by the provider that a deficiency exists. This response is also not to be construed as an admission of fault by the facility, its employees, agents or other individuals who draft or may be discussed in this response and plan of correction. This plan of correction is submitted as the facility's credible allegation of compliance and Soley because it is required Fire Alarm System - Testing and Maintenance K0345 1. On The facility a certified fire alarm vendor to perform annual duct detector differential testing. All required testing has now been completed and documented. 2. All residents and staff were considered at risk due to lack of documented testing. A facility-wide review of all fire alarm components was conducted on. 3. The facility established a service agreement to ensure all fire alarm testing (including duct detectors) is completed annually per NFPA 72 and NFPA 101 requirements. A compliance calendar has been implemented with alerts for required inspections and testing. The Director of Facilities/designee has been re-educated on required testing intervals and documentation. 4. The Director of Facilities or designee will audit for 3 months all documentation for the annual testing and inspection of the duct detector pressure differential test. The Director of Facilities will present the findings of site inspections for 3 months at Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) meetings to confirm inspections have taken place. During and at the conclusion of the three months, the QAPI committee will re-evaluate and initiate necessary action or extend the review period. The Administrator is responsible for confirming implementation and ongoing compliance with the components of the Plan of Correction. The Administrator is responsible for confirming the status of this Plan of Correction is reviewed and discussed at QAPI meetings and action initiated if required
Failure to Perform and Document Annual Main and Feeder Breaker Testing
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to perform and document required annual maintenance and testing of the main and feeder circuit breakers in accordance with NFPA 99 and manufacturer recommendations. During a record review conducted between 11:30 AM and 3:00 PM, surveyors requested documentation of the annual main and feeder breaker exercise. The facility was unable to provide records demonstrating that this testing and exercising had been completed as required. In interviews conducted during the same time frame, the Director of Facilities acknowledged that the facility did not have documentation showing that the annual main and feeder breaker exercise was performed according to manufacturer recommendations. The report notes that this failure to comply with NFPA 99 (2012 and 2021 editions, Sections 6.4.4 and 6.5.4) could affect all occupants of the facility in the event of a fire or other emergency, and that written records of maintenance and testing are required to be maintained and readily available.
Plan Of Correction
Electrical Systems - Essential Electric System CFR(s): NFPA 101 Preparation and/or execution of this plan does not constitute admission or agreement by the provider that a deficiency exists. This response is also not to be construed as an admission of fault by the facility, its employees, agents or other individuals who draft or may be discussed in this response and plan of correction. This plan of correction is submitted as the facility's credible allegation of compliance and Soley because it is required Electrical Systems - Essential Electric System Maintenance and Testing K0918 1. On A licensed electrical contractor performed the annual main and feeder breaker testing/exercising in accordance with manufacturer recommendations. Documentation has been completed and is maintained on-site. 2. All residents were considered at risk due to lack of documented testing. A full review of the essential electrical system was conducted on 3. A preventative maintenance program has been implemented to ensure that annual breaker testing is completed per NFPA 99 (2012). The facility has incorporated electrical system testing into its environmental compliance tracking system. The Director of Facilities/designee received re-education on NFPA requirements. 4. The Director of Facilities will audit electrical system maintenance logs quarterly for 12 months. Inspections have taken place. During and at the conclusion of the three months, the QAPI committee will re-evaluate and initiate necessary action or extend the review period. The Administrator is responsible for confirming implementation and ongoing compliance with the components of the Plan of Correction, and resolving variances that may occur. The Administrator is responsible for confirming the status of this Plan of Correction is reviewed and discussed at QAPI meetings and action initiated if required. Electrical Systems - Essential Electric System CFR(s): NFPA 101 Preparation and/or execution of this plan does not constitute admission or agreement by the provider that a deficiency exists. This response is also not to be construed as an admission of fault by the facility, its employees, agents or other individuals who draft or may be discussed in this response and plan of correction. This plan of correction is submitted as the facility's credible allegation of compliance and Soley because it is required Electrical Systems - Essential Electric System Maintenance and Testing K0918 1. On A licensed electrical contractor performed the annual main and feeder breaker testing/exercising in accordance with manufacturer recommendations. Documentation has been completed and is maintained on-site. 2. All residents were considered at risk due to lack of documented testing. A full review of the essential electrical system was conducted on . 3. A preventative maintenance program has been implemented to ensure that annual breaker testing is completed per NFPA 99 (2012). The facility has incorporated electrical system testing into its environmental compliance tracking system. The Director of Facilities/designee received re-education on NFPA requirements. 4. The Director of Facilities will audit electrical system maintenance logs quarterly for 12 months. Inspections have taken place. During and at the conclusion of the three months, the QAPI committee will re-evaluate and initiate necessary action or extend the review period. The Administrator is responsible for confirming implementation and ongoing compliance with the components of the Plan of Correction, , and resolving variances that may occur. The Administrator is responsible for confirming the status of this Plan of Correction is reviewed and discussed at QAPI meetings and action initiated if required.
Improper Use of Adapters and Power Strips for Refrigerators
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves improper use of electrical adapters and power strips as substitutes for permanent wiring, in violation of NFPA 99 and NFPA 70 requirements. During an observation with the Director of Facilities, surveyors found that an adapter was being used to power a refrigerator in the kitchen. The Director of Facilities acknowledged that an adapter was in use for this refrigerator, contrary to the standards that prohibit adapters from being used in place of fixed wiring. In a separate observation with the Director of Facilities, surveyors identified that a refrigerator in the dining room manager's office was plugged into a power strip. The Director of Facilities acknowledged that a power strip was being used for this refrigerator. These findings showed that the facility was not complying with NFPA 99 provisions that require power strips and adapters not be used as substitutes for permanent wiring for such equipment.
Plan Of Correction
Formatted text (without <text> tags or quotes): Electrical Equipment - Power and Extension Preparation and/or execution of this plan does not constitute admission or agreement by the provider that a deficiency exists. This response is also not to be construed as an admission of fault by the facility, its employees, agents or other individuals who draft or may be discussed in this response and plan of correction. This plan of correction is submitted as the facility's credible allegation of compliance and Soley because it is required Electrical Equipment - Power and Extension K0920 1. On The adapter in the kitchen refrigerator and the power strip in the dining room manager's office were immediately removed. All equipment was plugged directly into approved wall outlets. 2. On A facility-wide inspection was conducted by The Director of Facilities to identify improper use of power strips and adapters. Any non-compliant items were removed immediately. 3. On Staff were educated on proper electrical safety practices, including prohibited use of extension and adapters. Routine environmental rounds now include electrical safety checks. 4. The Director of Facilities/designee will conduct monthly environmental rounds for 3 months, then quarterly thereafter. Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) meetings to confirm inspections have taken place. During and at the conclusion of the three months, the QAPI committee will re-evaluate and initiate necessary action or extend the review period. The Administrator is responsible for confirming implementation and ongoing compliance with the components of the Plan of Correction, and resolving variances that Continued from page occur. The Administrator is responsible for confirming the status of this Plan of Correction is reviewed and discussed at QAPI meetings and action initiated if required. Electrical Equipment - Power and Extension CFR(s): NFPA 101 Preparation and/or execution of this plan does not constitute admission or agreement by the provider that a deficiency exists. This response is also not to be construed as an admission of fault by the facility, its employees, agents or other individuals who draft or may be discussed in this response and plan of correction. This plan of correction is submitted as the facility's credible allegation of compliance and Soley because it is required Electrical Equipment - Power and Extension K0920 1. On The adapter in the kitchen refrigerator and the power strip in the dining room manager's office were immediately removed. All equipment was plugged directly into approved wall outlets. 2. On A facility-wide inspection was conducted by The Director of Facilities to identify improper use of power strips and adapters. Any non-compliant items were removed immediately. 3. On Staff were educated on proper electrical safety practices, including prohibited use of extension and adapters. Routine environmental rounds now include electrical safety checks. 4. The Director of Facilities/designee will conduct monthly environmental rounds for 3 months, then quarterly thereafter. Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) meetings to confirm inspections have taken place. During and at the conclusion of the three months, the QAPI committee will re-evaluate and initiate necessary action or extend the review period. The Administrator is responsible for confirming implementation and ongoing compliance with the components of the Plan of Correction, and resolving variances that may occur. The Administrator is responsible for confirming the status of this Plan of Correction is reviewed and discussed at QAPI meetings and action initiated if required.
Food Safety and Sanitation Deficiencies in Main and Satellite Kitchens
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors identified multiple failures to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in both the main kitchen and a satellite pantry kitchen. In the main kitchen, a cook’s beard cover did not fully cover all facial hair, and the handwashing sink initially did not provide warm water until the Executive Director manually adjusted a valve under the sink. In the pot washing area, full-sized steam table pans were stacked while still wet, and more than five plate domes with stuck-on food particles were found piled in the tray line area ready for use, indicating they had not been properly washed. Two large ice buckets were stained with black and grey mold-like discoloration and white wear marks. The high-temperature dishwashing machine in the main kitchen was run three times but failed to reach the required 180°F rinse temperature, only reaching 172°F, meaning dishes were not properly sanitized. In the second-floor satellite pantry kitchen, the high-temperature dishwashing machine was also run three times and failed to meet required wash temperatures, reaching only 139°F instead of the required 150–165°F, so dishes were not properly cleaned and sanitized. Additional sanitation and maintenance issues were observed, including a vent above serving dishes with a mold-like accumulation, broken and soiled cabinets above serving dishes with residue on the handles, and pantry floors with cracked, broken, and missing tiles with debris or residue buildup. The dishwasher chemical cabinet lock was rust-laden, the AC filter was covered with dark grey soot and dust, the juice dispenser with clean cups nearby had debris on top, and tray delivery carts contained large sheet trays with residue and stuck-on food debris. During a tray line observation, chopped tomatoes and sliced avocados on the salad line were held at 44°F and 45°F respectively, above the required 41°F or less, and the menu extension listed pureed peas for a pureed diet, but no pureed vegetable was present on the line.
Plan Of Correction
Food Procurement, Store/Prepare/Serve-Sanitary CFR(s): 483.60(i)(1)(2) §483.60(i) Food safety requirements. Preparation and/or execution of this plan does not constitute admission or agreement by the provider that a deficiency exists. This response is also not to be construed as an admission of fault by the facility, its employees, agents or other individuals who draft or may be discussed in this response and plan of correction. This plan of correction is submitted as the facility's credible allegation of compliance and Soley because it is required F0812 1. All identified sanitation issues were corrected on Hot water valve was fixed immediately by maintenance team Steam table pan wet nesting was corrected The 5 plate domes that were dirty were taken to the dishwasher to be washed Stained ice buckets were replaced with new ones Dishwashing machine not reaching temperature for rinse cycle was fixed by Eco lab the same day Team member was provided education and in-service on proper use of beard guard. Corrected on [R] 2.Identified issues from satellite Kitchen were corrected on [R] Dishwashing machine not reaching temperature for rinse cycle was fixed by Eco lab the same day The vent located above the serving dishes was cleaned by maintenance team The cabinets were cleaned immediately The floors of the pantry area were observed with broken, cracked, missing tiles, with buildup residue and debris. Maintenance director made aware in the process of getting replaced. The locking mechanism of the dishwasher chemical cabinet is rust laden. Laden removed and in the process of being replaced. The AC filter was cleaned by maintenance team Th juice dispenser was cleaned by dietary aide The large delivery trays with residue and food debris were discarded 3. Issues identified during Tray line observation were corrected: The chopped tomatoes and sliced avocados were discarded Pureed vegetable was added to the line. Inservice on serving all food groups, starches, protein and vegetables to residents on texture modified diet order. Inservice provided to all dietary aides Inservice on maintaining and holding temperatures for ready to eat foods. Inservice provided to all cooks and dietary aides Daily sanitation rounds will be conducted by the Certified Dietary manager /designee for one week. Weekly for 2 months. 4. The Certified Dietary Manager/Executive Chef/designee will report the findings of the above observations and audits to the monthly QAPI Committee. The Administrator is responsible for confirming implementation and compliance of this POC and and resolving any variances that may occur.
Failure to Honor Diet-Appropriate Menu Choices for Residents on Modified Diets
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide residents with menu choices that matched their physician-ordered diet textures and liquid consistencies. One resident with severe cognitive impairment had a physician order for a controlled diet with pureed texture and honey-thick liquids. During a noon meal observation, this resident’s meal ticket was stapled to a Regular Menu listing items such as lettuce and tomato salad, stir-fried vegetables, and a grilled cheese sandwich, none of which were appropriate for the resident’s ordered diet. The Registered Dietitian and the Dietetic Technician confirmed that Daily Menu printouts with Regular Menu options were provided to all residents, including those on mechanically altered diets, resulting in residents being offered choices that could not be honored due to diet restrictions. Another resident with moderate cognitive impairment had a physician order for a mechanical soft diet with nectar-thick liquids. This resident’s lunch tray ticket was also stapled to a Regular Menu that included salad greens, which are not allowed on a mechanical soft diet. On a separate breakfast observation, the same resident’s Regular Menu included fresh fruit as a choice, which the resident circled, but the tray contained canned peach halves instead. The resident stated she wanted her chosen fresh fruit rather than the peaches and reiterated her food preferences during the interview. Photographic evidence was obtained to document these discrepancies between ordered diets, menu offerings, and the food actually provided.
Plan Of Correction
Preparation and/or execution of this plan does not constitute admission or agreement by the provider that a deficiency exists. This response is also not to be construed as an admission of fault by the facility, its employees, agents or other individuals who draft or may be discussed in this response and plan of correction. This plan of correction is submitted as the facility's credible allegation of compliance and Soley because it is requiredF05501. Resident #54 and Resident #56 were immediately assessed by the Registered Dietitian (RD) & CDM (Certified Dietary Manager) for food preferences on Residents #54 and #56 were offered meal choices consistent with the prescribed diet. No adverse outcomes were identified. 2. 100% audit of all residents with therapeutic diets was completed on [R] by CDM to ensure menus and meal selections consistent with physician-ordered diets.On [R] , CDM provided in-service provided to dietary aides, certified nursing assistants, nurses, managers on new selective menu processes. 3. The facility implemented a diet-specific menu system and pre-meal diet verification process by reviewing the diet in tray ticket program IMPAC and PCC. Copies of the menus to be provided as part of the audits.Diet Menu was revised to include a mechanically altered diet to be consistent with physician orders. Therapeutic diets menus are available and offered to each resident according to physician orders. The Dietary Manager or designee will conduct weekly audits of 4 residents on therapeutic diets x 4 weeks then monthly x 2months, to verify the correct menu is offered and served. 4. The Dietary Manager or designee will report findings at the monthly QAPI meeting. The Administrator is responsible for confirming implementation and compliance with this POC and [R] , and resolving any variances that occur.
Failure to Follow Therapeutic Diet Orders and Provide Prescribed Nutritional Supplements
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to follow physician-ordered therapeutic diets and prescribed nutritional supplements for multiple residents. One resident with severe cognitive impairment and a physician’s order for a controlled diet with pureed texture and honey-thick liquids was observed at lunch without the ordered pureed vegetable; her plate contained only pureed chicken, a pureed starch, and possibly a pureed bread, all covered in gravy. The pureed menu for that meal listed broccoli as the vegetable, and a subsequent tray line observation on another day showed no pureed vegetables available, despite the pureed menu specifying pureed peas. The dietary manager and registered dietitian were informed of the missing pureed vegetables, and photographic evidence was obtained. The facility also failed to provide ordered Magic Cup nutritional supplements as prescribed. One resident with severe cognitive impairment and a care plan addressing risk for compromised nutritional status had a physician’s order for a 4 oz Magic Cup on day and evening shifts with lunch and dinner; during a breakfast observation, the meal ticket listed Magic Cup, but none was provided. Another resident with moderate cognitive impairment had a physician’s order for a 4 oz Magic Cup with lunch; during lunch observation, the meal ticket indicated Magic Cup, but the resident was served chocolate ice cream and ate coconut cream pie for dessert instead. The MAR documented 100% consumption of a Magic Cup on two consecutive days, despite the observed failure to provide it. During interviews, the RD and dietary manager explained that Magic Cups were to be provided by dietary staff either on trays or via the dessert/ice cream cart, but they could not explain why residents in the dining room did not receive the ordered supplements. Photographic evidence was obtained of these occurrences.
Plan Of Correction
Preparation and/or execution of this plan does not constitute admission or agreement by the provider that a deficiency exists. This response is also not to be construed as an admission of fault by the facility, its employees, agents or other individuals who draft or may be discussed in this response and plan of correction. This plan of correction is submitted as the facility's credible allegation of compliance and Soley because it is required F0803 1. Upon identification, resident #54 was given pureed vegetables. Residents #23, #39, and #54 were given Magic Cup supplements as ordered. On [R] CDM re-educated team members on supplement delivery including proper documentation and confirming that pureed diet being served matches what is listed on spread sheet. Dietary aides' morning and evening shifts are accountable for serving all food groups including vegetables when serving puree meals to residents. 2. A 100% audit of all residents with therapeutic diets and/or supplements was completed on [R] by Certified Dietary Manager. 3. A tray line checklist and diet/supplement reconciliation process between dietary and nursing were implemented by [R]. RD oversight of menu compliance was initiated. The Certified Dietary Manager or designee will audit food tray weekly x 4 weeks then weekly x 2 months. 4. The Certified Dietary Manager/Designee will report on the findings at the monthly QAPI meeting. The Administrator is responsible for confirming implementation and compliance with this POC and [R], and resolving any variances that may occur.
Failure to Verify and Honor DNR Order Before Initiating CPR
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to honor a resident’s clearly established Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) status during a cardiac emergency. The resident had multiple medical diagnoses, including cerebral infarction, COPD, cardiomyopathy, atherosclerotic heart disease, a nonrheumatic mitral valve disorder, cognitive communication deficit, and immunodeficiency. The medical record contained DNR orders created on two separate dates with no end dates, a DNR document signed by the resident and a nurse practitioner, and a 3008 form listing the resident’s advance directive as DNR. The resident’s MDS showed a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 15, indicating intact cognition, and progress notes documented that the difference between DNR/no CPR and full code had been explained over 30 minutes, after which the resident chose DNR and reiterated to social services that she did not want to be resuscitated or undergo chest compressions. On the day of the incident, a CNA assigned to the resident checked on her and found her sitting in a wheelchair and unresponsive despite multiple verbal attempts to rouse her. The CNA notified the RN, who obtained a blood pressure machine, entered the room, then ran out to the nurses’ station, after which a code blue was paged over the intercom. The RN returned with a crash cart, and additional nursing staff, including RNs and LPNs, entered the room. Staff described transferring the unresponsive resident from the wheelchair to the bed and beginning chest compressions. Multiple staff members reported that when one LPN asked about the resident’s code status, no one in the room knew it at that time, and that this LPN left the room to verify the code status while CPR was already in progress. Interviews and video review confirmed that CPR was initiated and continued for approximately 12 minutes before EMS arrived, despite the resident’s existing DNR orders. Several nurses, including those who arrived after CPR had started, acknowledged that they did not check the resident’s code status before assisting with chest compressions or using a bag-valve mask. Staff later reported that the LPN who checked the record returned and announced that the resident was a DNR, yet compressions continued until EMS arrived. The physician stated that the resident was already in the system as a DNR and that staff were expected to check code status before performing CPR. The DON and regional nurse consultant confirmed, based on interviews and camera review, that staff failed to confirm the resident’s code status prior to initiating CPR and that CPR was performed against the resident’s wishes, leading surveyors to determine that this failure resulted in Immediate Jeopardy.
Removal Plan
- Implemented a revised admission/readmission process requiring an Advance Directive discussion form to be completed by the licensed nurse upon admission or with change in advance directives, with follow-up by Social Services.
- Reviewed Advance Directive discussion forms in the daily clinical meeting with the Interdisciplinary Team.
- Conducted a huddle on units after the clinical meeting to discuss any changes in advance directives/code status.
- Placed signage on each crash cart stating: "Stop check physician order prior to starting Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation."
- Implemented the "It Takes Two" process requiring two licensed nurses to verify code status/advance directives prior to initiation of CPR.
- Initiated an internal investigation including resident record review, staff interviews, and notification to the physician and resident representative.
- Suspended and terminated the assigned nurse and reported the nurse’s license to the licensing board.
- Suspended and terminated an additional nurse who responded and participated in initiation of CPR and reported the nurse’s license to the licensing board.
- Suspended two additional nurses pending investigation and returned them to work with disciplinary action, education on ANE/honoring advance directives, and participation in a code blue drill.
- Conducted a 100% audit of all current residents’ code status and care plans.
- Conducted a 100% audit of crash carts to ensure all required items were present.
- Reviewed CPR cards for identified nurses to confirm validity and inclusion of in-person skills competencies.
- Held an ad hoc QAPI meeting with Administrator, DON, Medical Director, and department heads.
- Completed an audit of residents discharged, transferred to the hospital, or expired to verify advance directives were honored.
- Provided staff education for licensed/certified staff on medical emergency response and communication of advance directives and code status, following physician orders related to advance directives, the "It Takes Two" verification process, and CNA roles during code blue.
- Provided all-staff education on Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation/Resident Rights with focus on honoring advance directives.
- Completed honoring advance directives attestation with licensed nursing staff.
- Completed physician orders education for licensed nursing staff.
- Completed medical emergency response and communication of code status education for licensed nursing staff.
- Completed ANE/Resident Rights education for all staff.
- Completed advance directives posttest for licensed staff.
- Completed ANE/Resident Rights posttest for all staff.
- Completed code blue process/"It Takes Two" education for licensed nursing staff.
- Began code blue drills every shift and required licensed nurses to attend a mock code blue quality assurance drill prior to working.
- Completed CNA roles-in-code-blue training.
- Completed quality reviews validating staff competencies for completed education.
- Completed quality reviews of newly admitted residents to verify completion of the advance directive discussion form.
- Implemented Director of Clinical Services chart review of residents who expire at the facility or are transferred to the hospital after a cardiac event to verify advance directives were followed.
Some of the Latest Corrective Actions taken by Facilities in Florida
- Implemented a revised admission/readmission process requiring completion of an Advance Directive discussion form by a licensed nurse upon admission or with change in advance directives, with Social Services follow-up (J - F0578 - FL) (J - F0578 - FL)
- Reviewed Advance Directive discussion forms in daily clinical meetings with the Interdisciplinary Team and conducted post-meeting unit huddles to communicate code-status/advance-directive changes (J - F0578 - FL)
- Implemented an “It Takes Two” process requiring two licensed nurses to verify code status/advance directives prior to initiating CPR (J - F0578 - FL)
- Placed crash-cart signage instructing staff to stop and check the physician order prior to starting CPR (J - F0578 - FL)
- Implemented Emergency Response Binders with Florida DNRO forms (for applicable residents), a DNRO verification checklist, and a code-status reference guide, and placed them at designated locations (J - F0678 - FL) (J - F0578 - FL)
- Established designated locations for goldenrod (yellow) paper for printing Florida DNRO forms and educated staff on where to find it (J - F0678 - FL) (J - F0578 - FL)
- Implemented a Florida DNRO form admission/readmission checklist to verify required signatures, proxy authority, proper completion, and physical availability of the DNRO form (J - F0578 - FL)
- Assigned Human Resources to monitor licensed nurses’ CPR cards for ongoing active certification and to verify CPR certification for newly hired licensed nurses (J - F0678 - FL)
- Implemented a requirement that all new employees participated in a Code Blue drill upon hire (J - F0726 - FL)
- Implemented a requirement that licensed nurses did not work prior to attending a mock Code Blue quality assurance drill (J - F0578 - FL) (J - F0726 - FL) (J - F0600 - FL)
- Implemented a requirement that licensed nursing staff signed an Honoring Advance Directive Attestation upon hire (J - F0726 - FL) (J - F0600 - FL)
- Conducted ongoing Code Blue drills on each shift with results reviewed in QAPI meetings to determine need for further drills and/or education (J - F0678 - FL)
- Held ongoing monthly QAPI meetings to review and revise education, audits, code blue drills, and post-tests as indicated (J - F0678 - FL) (J - F0578 - FL)
- Implemented Director of Clinical Services chart review of residents who expired at the facility or were transferred to the hospital after a cardiac event to verify advance directives were followed (J - F0578 - FL)
- Educated licensed/certified staff on medical emergency response and communication of advance directives/code status, following physician orders related to advance directives, the “It Takes Two” verification process, and CNA roles during code blue (J - F0578 - FL)
- Educated licensed nurses on CPR policy/procedure, Advanced Directives policy/procedure, and Abuse/Neglect (with post-testing and required passing scores) (J - F0678 - FL) (J - F0600 - FL)
- Educated licensed nurses on Resident Rights related to Advance Directives, verification of code status/advance directives, DNR orders, Florida DNRO requirements, CPR/EMS response requirements, and EMR documentation (with post-testing) (J - F0678 - FL) (J - F0578 - FL)
- Educated all employees on Abuse and Neglect policy/procedure (including reporting requirements) (J - F0600 - FL)
- Educated facility staff on Resident Rights and Abuse/Neglect and Exploitation with emphasis on honoring advance directives (J - F0578 - FL) (J - F0726 - FL) (J - F0600 - FL)
- Educated licensed staff on honoring advance directives, physician orders, timeliness of initiating CPR, and the Code Blue process (J - F0726 - FL) (J - F0600 - FL)
Failure to Verify and Honor DNR Order Before Initiating CPR
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to honor a resident’s clearly established Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) status during a cardiac emergency. The resident had multiple medical diagnoses, including cerebral infarction, COPD, cardiomyopathy, atherosclerotic heart disease, a nonrheumatic mitral valve disorder, cognitive communication deficit, and immunodeficiency. The medical record contained DNR orders created on two separate dates with no end dates, a DNR document signed by the resident and a nurse practitioner, and a 3008 form listing the resident’s advance directive as DNR. The resident’s MDS showed a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 15, indicating intact cognition, and progress notes documented that the difference between DNR/no CPR and full code had been explained over 30 minutes, after which the resident chose DNR and reiterated to social services that she did not want to be resuscitated or undergo chest compressions. On the day of the incident, a CNA assigned to the resident checked on her and found her sitting in a wheelchair and unresponsive despite multiple verbal attempts to rouse her. The CNA notified the RN, who obtained a blood pressure machine, entered the room, then ran out to the nurses’ station, after which a code blue was paged over the intercom. The RN returned with a crash cart, and additional nursing staff, including RNs and LPNs, entered the room. Staff described transferring the unresponsive resident from the wheelchair to the bed and beginning chest compressions. Multiple staff members reported that when one LPN asked about the resident’s code status, no one in the room knew it at that time, and that this LPN left the room to verify the code status while CPR was already in progress. Interviews and video review confirmed that CPR was initiated and continued for approximately 12 minutes before EMS arrived, despite the resident’s existing DNR orders. Several nurses, including those who arrived after CPR had started, acknowledged that they did not check the resident’s code status before assisting with chest compressions or using a bag-valve mask. Staff later reported that the LPN who checked the record returned and announced that the resident was a DNR, yet compressions continued until EMS arrived. The physician stated that the resident was already in the system as a DNR and that staff were expected to check code status before performing CPR. The DON and regional nurse consultant confirmed, based on interviews and camera review, that staff failed to confirm the resident’s code status prior to initiating CPR and that CPR was performed against the resident’s wishes, leading surveyors to determine that this failure resulted in Immediate Jeopardy.
Removal Plan
- Implemented a revised admission/readmission process requiring an Advance Directive discussion form to be completed by the licensed nurse upon admission or with change in advance directives, with follow-up by Social Services.
- Reviewed Advance Directive discussion forms in the daily clinical meeting with the Interdisciplinary Team.
- Conducted a huddle on units after the clinical meeting to discuss any changes in advance directives/code status.
- Placed signage on each crash cart stating: "Stop check physician order prior to starting Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation."
- Implemented the "It Takes Two" process requiring two licensed nurses to verify code status/advance directives prior to initiation of CPR.
- Initiated an internal investigation including resident record review, staff interviews, and notification to the physician and resident representative.
- Suspended and terminated the assigned nurse and reported the nurse’s license to the licensing board.
- Suspended and terminated an additional nurse who responded and participated in initiation of CPR and reported the nurse’s license to the licensing board.
- Suspended two additional nurses pending investigation and returned them to work with disciplinary action, education on ANE/honoring advance directives, and participation in a code blue drill.
- Conducted a 100% audit of all current residents’ code status and care plans.
- Conducted a 100% audit of crash carts to ensure all required items were present.
- Reviewed CPR cards for identified nurses to confirm validity and inclusion of in-person skills competencies.
- Held an ad hoc QAPI meeting with Administrator, DON, Medical Director, and department heads.
- Completed an audit of residents discharged, transferred to the hospital, or expired to verify advance directives were honored.
- Provided staff education for licensed/certified staff on medical emergency response and communication of advance directives and code status, following physician orders related to advance directives, the "It Takes Two" verification process, and CNA roles during code blue.
- Provided all-staff education on Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation/Resident Rights with focus on honoring advance directives.
- Completed honoring advance directives attestation with licensed nursing staff.
- Completed physician orders education for licensed nursing staff.
- Completed medical emergency response and communication of code status education for licensed nursing staff.
- Completed ANE/Resident Rights education for all staff.
- Completed advance directives posttest for licensed staff.
- Completed ANE/Resident Rights posttest for all staff.
- Completed code blue process/"It Takes Two" education for licensed nursing staff.
- Began code blue drills every shift and required licensed nurses to attend a mock code blue quality assurance drill prior to working.
- Completed CNA roles-in-code-blue training.
- Completed quality reviews validating staff competencies for completed education.
- Completed quality reviews of newly admitted residents to verify completion of the advance directive discussion form.
- Implemented Director of Clinical Services chart review of residents who expire at the facility or are transferred to the hospital after a cardiac event to verify advance directives were followed.
Failure to Honor Full Code Status and Initiate CPR for Unresponsive Resident
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to provide basic life support/CPR in accordance with a resident’s documented full code status and physician orders. Facility policy required that CPR be provided to all residents in cardiac arrest unless there was a fully executed DNR order, and that in the absence of such an order, the nurse must immediately begin CPR and continue until EMS assumed responsibility. The policy also required two nurses to verify resident identification and the presence of a fully executed DNR order in the advanced directive section of the medical record. In this case, the resident had a care plan and a physician’s order specifying full code status, and there was no documentation of a DNR order. Record review showed that the resident was cognitively intact, required substantial/maximal assistance with ADLs, had a tracheostomy and a feeding tube, and was receiving hospice services. The hospice nurse reported that the resident was alert, oriented, and personally chose to be full code, and that hospice honored residents’ decisions to remain full code. Despite this, when the resident was found unresponsive, the required verification of code status and initiation of CPR did not occur. A CNA working the night shift found the resident unresponsive at the start of her shift and immediately notified the RN assigned to the resident, then continued her rounds. The assigned RN stated that upon being notified, she assessed the resident around 11:15 PM, found no breathing and no vital signs, but did not check the chart for code status and did not initiate CPR or call 911. She reported that she assumed the resident was DNR because the resident was on hospice, and instead called the physician, who told her to call hospice, and then she called hospice. A progress note later documented that the resident was found with no chest rise and no vital signs, hospice was called, a hospice nurse was dispatched, and post-mortem care was provided. Another RN on the same shift stated that when he returned from break around 12:30 AM, he saw a hospice chaplain at the nurses’ station and observed the first RN charting; when told the resident had died, he saw on the computer that the resident was full code and informed the first RN of this, but he did not report the situation to anyone and continued his shift. The facility later identified that no CPR or emergency services were initiated for a resident with a full code order, and the resident died. The facility determined that Immediate Jeopardy began when the resident was found unresponsive and no CPR was initiated, and that the noncompliance involved failure to follow the advanced directive and CPR policies and procedures. Interviews with leadership confirmed that the expectation was for licensed nurses to follow facility policy and perform CPR in the absence of DNR orders, and that in this incident, those expectations were not met. The root cause analysis identified failure to follow the Advanced Directive Policy and Procedure as the cause of the noncompliance.
Removal Plan
- Provided individualized training to the involved registered nurse on the Florida Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) Policy with emphasis on steps to take when a resident is unresponsive.
- Suspended the involved registered nurse pending investigation.
- Terminated the involved registered nurse’s employment.
- Verified that current licensed nurses have active BLS/CPR certification cards.
- Completed code blue drills, education, and post-testing for licensed nurses to validate understanding and competency.
- Completed an audit of Advanced Directive Discussion forms to ensure resident code status reflects and honors resident wishes.
- Held an ad hoc QAPI Committee meeting to review root cause analysis recommendations (including Medical Director participation) and obtained committee approval of recommendations.
- Developed and initiated a Performance Improvement Plan based on the root cause analysis, identifying failure to follow the Advanced Directive Policy and Procedure.
- Initiated code drills and continued until all current nursing staff participated.
- Provided education to the second nurse who identified the code status regarding the importance of reporting the incident to facility administration.
- Provided licensed nurse education on CPR Policy/Procedure, Advanced Directives Policy/Procedure, and Abuse/Neglect, with post-testing and required passing scores.
- Continued Code Blue Drills on each shift, with results reviewed in QAPI meetings to determine need for further drills and/or education.
- Assigned the Human Resources Generalist to monitor licensed nurses’ CPR cards to ensure active CPR certification and to verify CPR certification for all newly hired licensed nurses.
Failure to Honor Full Code Status and Initiate CPR for Hospice Resident
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to honor a resident’s full code status and to provide ordered emergency care/CPR when the resident was found unresponsive. The resident was cognitively intact, had a tracheostomy and a feeding tube, required substantial/maximal assistance with activities of daily living, and was receiving hospice services. The resident’s care plan and physician’s orders documented an advanced directive of full code. Despite this, when the resident was found without chest rise and without vital signs, no CPR or emergency services were initiated. On the night of the incident, a CNA working the 11P–7A shift found the resident unresponsive during initial rounds and immediately notified the RN assigned to the resident. The CNA then continued with her rounds. The RN assessed the resident, determined that the resident was not breathing and had no vital signs, but did not check the resident’s chart or electronic record for code status. The RN assumed the resident was a DNR because the resident was on hospice, and therefore did not initiate CPR or call 911. Instead, the RN called the physician, who instructed her to call hospice, and hospice was notified. A hospice nurse was dispatched, and post-mortem care was provided. The RN documented that the resident was found with no chest rising and no vital signs, that hospice was called, and that post-mortem care was provided, but did not document any attempt at CPR. Another RN on the same 7P–7A shift returned from break around 12:30 AM and saw a hospice chaplain at the nurses’ station and the first RN charting. When he inquired, he was told that the resident had died. He observed on the computer screen that the resident was a full code and informed the first RN of this. Despite recognizing that the resident was a full code, he did not report the situation to anyone, continued his shift, and left the facility without notifying administration. The facility’s Regional Nurse Consultant later discovered, during chart audits of discharged residents, that no CPR had been performed on a resident with full code status and notified the Administrator. The Administrator, who also served as Abuse Coordinator, confirmed with the first RN that CPR and 911 had not been initiated. The facility’s abuse and neglect policy defined neglect as failure to provide necessary goods and services to avoid physical harm, pain, mental anguish, or emotional distress, and included failure to report observed or suspected abuse or neglect as an example of neglect. The failure to perform CPR on a full-code resident and the failure of staff to report the incident to administration were identified as neglect. The Immediate Jeopardy began when the resident was found unresponsive and no CPR or emergency services were initiated, despite the resident’s documented full code status. The facility’s own review and interviews established that the RN responsible for the resident did not verify code status and acted on an assumption based solely on the resident’s hospice enrollment. Additionally, the second RN, after learning that the deceased resident was a full code, did not report the occurrence to administration or take further action. These inactions, in the context of the facility’s abuse and neglect policy and the resident’s clearly documented wishes and orders, led to the determination of neglect and Immediate Jeopardy related to failure to provide basic life support according to physician’s orders and advanced directives.
Removal Plan
- Provided individualized training to the involved registered nurse on the Florida Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Policy, emphasizing steps to take when a resident is unresponsive.
- Suspended the involved registered nurse pending investigation.
- Terminated the involved registered nurse’s employment.
- Verified all current licensed nurses have active BLS/CPR certification cards.
- Conducted code blue drills, education, and post-testing for all licensed nurses.
- Completed an audit of Advanced Directive Discussion forms to ensure resident code status reflects and honors resident wishes.
- Held an ad hoc QAPI Committee meeting to review root cause analysis recommendations.
- Developed and initiated a Performance Improvement Plan based on the root cause analysis identifying failure to follow the Advanced Directive Policy and Procedure.
- Initiated code drills until all current nursing staff participated.
- Provided education to the second nurse who identified the code status regarding the importance of reporting the incident to facility administration.
- Initiated licensed nurse education on CPR policy and procedure, Advanced Directives policy and procedure, Abuse and Neglect, and the requirement to report neglect to administration, with post-testing and participation in code blue drills to validate competency.
- Educated all employees on the Abuse and Neglect policy and procedure, including reporting requirements.
Failure to Properly Enter and Process STAT Lab Orders Resulting in Delayed or Missed Diagnostics
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to properly enter and process STAT and routine laboratory orders in the electronic medical record and the external lab portal, resulting in ordered labs not being drawn or not being treated as STAT for multiple residents. For one resident with dementia and hypertension, an ARNP ordered STAT CBC, CMP, chest x‑ray, and other diagnostics after the resident was noted with shortness of breath, labored breathing, and an oxygen saturation of 73% on room air. The LPN caring for the resident stated that the unit manager entered the labs into the lab website, but the lab company reported there was no phone call or requisition ticket for STAT labs and confirmed that no labs were drawn that day. Later that night, another LPN found the resident pale, gasping, with very low respirations and oxygen saturation despite oxygen, and a code blue was initiated with CPR and EMS transfer to the hospital. The PCP and ARNP both stated they were not aware the STAT labs had not been completed and expected the orders to be carried out and results communicated. Another resident with aphasia, hemiplegia, dementia, and a determination of incapacity had orders for CBC and CMP and, per staff and PCP interviews, was to have STAT labs, STAT chest x‑ray, flu and COVID swabs, nebulizer treatments, oxygen, and Ceftriaxone after presenting with fever over 102°F, oxygen saturation of 89%, labored breathing, and crackles in the lungs. The LPN who contacted the PCP reported that all labs and the chest x‑ray were ordered STAT, but the weekend supervisor entered the CBC and CMP as routine labs scheduled for a later date, and flu/COVID tests were not ordered until two days later. The medical record lacked documentation of the change in condition and the STAT nature of the orders on the day they were given. The resident’s labs were ultimately collected later, showing critically high sodium and other abnormal values, and the resident was later sent to the hospital with altered mental status, hypoxia, high fever, and was diagnosed with influenza A, septic shock, and multiorgan failure. A third resident, cognitively intact with diabetes, obesity, hypotension, and a gastrostomy, experienced vomiting, poor intake, and increased confusion. The provider ordered STAT CBC, CMP, and ammonia level for nausea, vomiting, and confusion. One LPN entered the STAT lab orders into the facility charting system while another LPN believed the first nurse would enter the orders into the lab system. The lab later reported that the orders were entered as routine, not STAT, and that while CBC and CMP were drawn and resulted, the ammonia level was not completed due to a specimen issue and was only noted in the portal. A fourth resident with atherosclerotic heart disease, Lewy body neurocognitive disorder, hypertension, and cardiomegaly had an episode of vomiting and chest pain with elevated blood pressure; the NP ordered IM medications, nitroglycerin, and STAT chest x‑ray, CBC, and CMP. The chest x‑ray was completed the same evening, but the CBC and CMP were entered as routine and not drawn until the next morning, with the lab confirming they were not processed as STAT. The DON and PCP acknowledged that the timing between ordering and completion was not acceptable for STAT labs and that there were problems with the lab process and nursing follow‑through on STAT orders.
Removal Plan
- The Director of Nursing was educated by the Regional Nurse Consultant on the process to review clinical records to validate diagnostic testing was completed per provider orders and that providers were notified of results.
- The Director of Nursing reviewed clinical records of current residents with diagnostic test orders from the prior 30 days to validate labs/diagnostic tests were completed as ordered and notified providers of any discrepancies.
- The Assistant Director of Nursing/Staff Development Coordinator began educating licensed nurses on the process to obtain STAT labs from the current lab service.
- The ADON/SDC educated licensed nurses on the process to obtain STAT labs from the current lab service.
- The Staff Development Coordinator began competency validation for licensed nurses on the process for obtaining routine and STAT labs.
- Step-by-step instructions for obtaining labs through the lab website (including STATs) were placed in the front of each lab binder.
- Licensed nurse education on the lab process, provider notification, and documentation was completed for nurses (with sign-in sheets and voice/text education reports used to validate completion).
- An ad hoc QAPI was completed with the Medical Director, Administrator, Director of Nursing, and additional IDT members addressing adherence to policy/process for change in condition, following provider orders, obtaining STAT labs, reviewing diagnostic results, and notifying providers; discussion included provider access to the EMR and ability to view lab/diagnostic results.
Invalid DNRO Led to CPR Against Resident’s Stated DNR Wishes
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to ensure a resident’s Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) wishes were honored due to an invalid Florida Do Not Resuscitate Order (DNRO) form being provided to Emergency Medical Services (EMS). The resident, an elderly male with a history of stroke, type 2 diabetes, heart failure, HIV, coronary artery disease, renal insufficiency, and non-Alzheimer’s dementia, was admitted with a documented DNR order in the electronic medical record (EMR). A hospital transfer form indicated he was alert but disoriented, required a surrogate for decision making, and was a DNR. The EMR contained a Florida DNRO form dated and signed only by the hospital physician, with no signatures from the resident or an authorized representative, and no power of attorney, health care surrogate, or proxy documents were scanned into the EMR. On the morning of the incident, a CNA found the resident unresponsive at approximately 5:45 AM and notified the assigned RN. The RN assessed the resident, was unable to obtain a blood pressure, pulse, or respirations, and left the room to verify the code status in the EMR, which confirmed the resident was a DNR. Despite this, the RN called EMS and documented that she could not obtain vital signs. She later stated she thought she saw the resident take small breaths and called EMS based on a prior company policy, but could not explain the discrepancy between her observation and her documentation that respirations were absent. When EMS arrived, the RN showed them the DNR order in the EMR, and EMS requested a physical copy of the Florida DNRO form. The RN was unable to locate a paper DNRO form and instead printed the scanned hospital DNRO onto goldenrod paper. EMS determined the form was invalid because it lacked the signature of the resident or his authorized representative and therefore initiated CPR. EMS performed three rounds of CPR before discontinuing efforts and pronouncing the resident deceased at 6:40 AM. Interviews with the resident’s daughter confirmed she was his health care proxy, that she had informed facility staff of his wish to be a DNR, and that she was later told EMS performed CPR because the Florida DNRO form had not been signed. The Social Services Director and facility leadership acknowledged that staff had recognized the hospital DNRO form was incomplete prior to the event but failed to ensure a valid, signed Florida DNRO form was obtained and available, resulting in EMS performing CPR contrary to the resident’s documented DNR status. The facility’s policies for CPR and documentation required adherence to residents’ advance directives and accurate, complete documentation in the medical record. Staff interviews and the facility’s internal investigation confirmed that although the DNR order was present in the EMR and the need for a surrogate and DNR status had been identified, the Florida DNRO form remained incomplete and unsigned by the resident or his proxy at the time of the emergency. During the emergency response, the absence of a valid DNRO form led EMS to determine that CPR must be initiated. This sequence of actions and inactions—failure to complete and validate the DNRO form, lack of proper documentation of the proxy’s authorization on the DNRO, and reliance on an invalid hospital DNRO—resulted in the resident receiving CPR against his stated wishes.
Removal Plan
- Initiated an internal investigation including resident record review and staff interviews; notified the Department of Children and Families, the Florida Agency for Health Care Administration, and local law enforcement; validated notification of the attending physician/medical director and the resident’s responsible party regarding the event.
- Conducted a 100% audit of all current residents’ code status and care plans; verified the presence of a valid Florida DNRO form for each applicable resident in the EMR.
- Conducted code blue drills across all shifts.
- Implemented Emergency Response Binders containing the Florida DNRO form for applicable residents, a facility Florida DNRO verification checklist, and a code status reference guide for staff; placed binders at each nurses’ station, the rehabilitation department, and the social services office.
- Provided education to licensed nurses, the Social Services Director, and the Admissions Coordinator on the location of goldenrod (yellow) paper for printing Florida DNRO forms.
- Educated staff that CPR must be initiated by EMS unless a valid Florida DNRO form is physically available.
- Established designated locations for goldenrod (yellow) paper for Florida DNRO forms to prevent delays.
- Held an Ad Hoc QAPI committee meeting to review education and audits.
- Completed a 100% chart audit of advance directives including code status, DNR orders, and Florida DNRO forms.
- Educated all licensed nurses on Resident Rights regarding Advance Directives; verification of code status and advance directives; DNR orders; Florida DNRO forms and requirements; CPR policy and EMS response requirements; communication of code status; location of goldenrod (yellow) paper for printing Florida DNRO forms; and complete and accurate documentation in the EMR; administered a post-test to ensure understanding.
- Trained all licensed nurses and had them complete post-tests; continued education to include new employees.
- Conducted Code Blue Drills with licensed nurses; scheduled remaining staff to complete a code blue drill upon return from leave.
- Held Ad Hoc QAPI meetings and a Monthly QAPI meeting with Administrator, Director of Nursing, Medical Director, and administrative staff to review and revise education, audits, code blue drills, and post-tests as indicated.
- Conducted staff interviews across all shifts to validate knowledge of advance directives, code status verification, Florida DNRO form completion, and location of Emergency Response Binders; validated education, audits, and code blue drill participation through interviews and review of attendance sheets and post-tests.
Failure to Ensure Valid DNRO Resulted in Unwanted CPR
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to honor a resident’s Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) wishes by not ensuring those wishes were completely and accurately documented to promote continuity of care between providers. The resident, an older male admitted with stroke, type 2 diabetes, essential hypertension, HIV, unspecified dementia, heart failure, coronary artery disease, renal insufficiency, and non-Alzheimer’s dementia, had a physician order for DNR in the electronic medical record (EMR). His Minimum Data Set assessment showed moderate cognitive impairment, and his care plan included impaired cognitive process with an intervention to communicate with the resident and family regarding his needs. The hospital transfer documentation (3008 form) indicated the resident was DNR, and a Florida Do Not Resuscitate Order (DNRO) form signed by the hospital physician was present in the EMR. On the night of admission, the LPN Supervisor reported that the resident was confused, so she and another nurse contacted the resident’s daughter by phone for consent to treat and to confirm his DNR status. They confirmed with the daughter that the resident’s wish was to be DNR and signed the facility’s Advance Directives Discussion Document, but they did not sign off on the Florida DNRO form. The Social Services Director (SSD) later reviewed the admission packet and noted that the Florida DNRO form was signed only by a physician and lacked any other signature. The SSD stated that she, the former DON, and the former ADON called the resident’s daughter to verify his wish not to have CPR, and confirmed that the two nurses on the call were RNs. However, the SSD could not explain why the nurses did not document this conversation, did not sign the Florida DNRO form until the resident or proxy could sign, and did not obtain the necessary signature by another means. On the morning of the resident’s death, the assigned RN reported that a CNA notified her that the resident was unresponsive at approximately 5:45 AM. The RN assessed the resident, found no blood pressure, pulse, or respirations, and confirmed in the EMR that the resident’s code status was DNR. She then called EMS and, upon their arrival, provided them with a printed copy of the Florida DNRO form, which she located on goldenrod-colored paper in the front office. EMS personnel observed that the form contained only the physician’s signature and lacked the resident’s or authorized representative’s signature, and informed the RN that the form was invalid. EMS then initiated CPR and continued until they discontinued efforts and pronounced the resident deceased. The resident’s daughter later confirmed she was his health care proxy, stated she had informed facility staff at admission that he was DNR, and was later told by facility staff that EMS performed CPR because the Florida DNRO form was not signed. The facility’s own policies required complete, accurate, and timely documentation of residents’ treatment choices and advance directives, but the necessary signatures and documentation for a valid Florida DNRO were not obtained or made available, leading to the failure to honor the resident’s DNR wishes.
Removal Plan
- Notify the attending physician, Medical Director, Administrator, interim DON and resident representative of the incident and initiate an investigation.
- Conduct an immediate 100% audit of all current residents' code status and care plan; verify the presence of a valid Florida DNRO form for each applicable resident in the EMR; confirm the form contains the physician and resident/proxy signatures, signature dates, and legal proxy authority; and contact attending physicians and legally authorized representatives to complete any missing or incomplete Florida DNRO form documentation.
- Print the Florida DNRO form for each applicable resident and place it in Emergency Response Binders.
- Place Emergency Response Binders on each unit, in the rehabilitation (therapy) room, and in social services.
- Initiate advanced directives audits weekly for three months to ensure the Florida DNRO form is complete and valid.
- Implement a revised admission/readmission process that includes Resident Rights and Advance Directive education upon admission, completion of an Advance Directives Discussion Document, and validation of advance directives by Social Services/designee.
- Provide education to licensed nurses, the Social Services Director, and the Admissions Coordinator on the location of goldenrod (yellow) paper for printing Florida DNRO forms.
- Provide education to licensed nurses, the Admissions Coordinator, and the SSD on documentation in the medical record to ensure each resident's medical record contains complete, accurate, and timely documentation.
- Educate the SSD on ensuring accuracy of advance directives and the Florida DNRO form.
- Implement a Florida DNRO form admission and readmission checklist to ensure verification of required signatures, confirmation of proxy authority, proper form completion, and physical availability of the Florida DNRO form.
- Hold an Ad Hoc QAPI committee meeting.
- Complete a 100% chart audit of advanced directives including code status, DNR orders, and Florida DNRO forms.
- Educate all licensed nurses on Resident Rights related to Advanced Directives, verification of advance directives, DNR orders, Florida DNRO forms and requirements, and complete and accurate documentation in the EMR.
- Require completion of a post-test following education to ensure understanding.
- Continue education for new employees.
- Hold Ad Hoc and monthly QAPI meetings with the Administrator, Director of Nursing, Medical Director, and administrative staff.
- Review and revise education, audits, and post-tests as indicated.
- Conduct staff interviews representing all shifts to assess knowledge of advanced directives, verification of code status, completion of the Florida DNRO form, and location of Emergency Response Binders.
Failure to Initiate CPR and Honor Full Code Status
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to ensure that nursing staff demonstrated competency in performing CPR and honoring a resident’s full code status. The resident involved had a documented physician progress note confirming that he understood the difference between full code and DNR and elected full code status. On the night of the incident, the resident was found unresponsive and without vital signs, yet facility staff did not initiate CPR. The facility’s LPN job description required current CPR certification and outlined responsibilities including directing CNAs, complying with policies and procedures, and participating in end-of-life care, but these expectations were not met in this event. According to interviews, a CNA who was not assigned to the resident was informed by the assigned CNA that the resident was not responding and not moving. As they proceeded to the room, they encountered the LPN at the nurses’ station, notified her of the situation, and the LPN stated she was on her way but continued what she was doing. When the LPN entered the room, she applied an oximeter and obtained an oxygen saturation of 60, which she described as “kind of low.” The CNA reported telling the LPN that the resident “is not here” and asking if they needed to call a code. The LPN left the room to check the resident’s code status, returned and confirmed he was full code, but still did not initiate CPR. The CNA stated that no one called a code blue, no overhead page was made, and no staff began CPR before EMS arrived. The LPN later stated she found the resident unresponsive, with cold feet and no response to sternal rub, and that she called 911, obtained the crash cart, and asked a CNA to get another nurse. She reported that she did not start CPR because she believed the resident was already dead, said she needed a backboard and help to move the resident due to his size, and did not ask the CNAs to assist. She acknowledged that she did not call a code, did not perform compressions, and that all staff present “did not do anything” while waiting for EMS. Other nurses who responded to the room, including an RN and another LPN, stated they did not start CPR, assumed the resident was a DNR based on how the situation was presented, did not verify the code status themselves, and did not call a code blue. The RN reported that she did not initiate CPR because she assumed the resident was a DNR and was focused on the idea that she was being asked to pronounce death, and only after contacting the DON did she learn the resident was full code and was told to start CPR, at which point EMS arrived. EMS personnel questioned why CPR had not been started if the resident was full code. The medical director stated that the expectation was that immediate CPR should be started for a full code resident and that nurses are not to pronounce death or rely on signs such as cold extremities, but instead should confirm code status and initiate CPR.
Removal Plan
- Initiated an internal investigation including resident record review, staff interviews, and notifications to DCF, AHCA, and local law enforcement.
- Suspended and terminated the assigned nurse and reported the nurse’s license to the licensing board.
- Suspended and terminated two additional nurses who responded to the scene and reported their licenses to the licensing board.
- Completed a facility-wide audit of resident code status preferences and verified that orders and care plans were correct.
- Reviewed residents with Do Not Resuscitate preferences to ensure a valid Florida DNRO was physically available at the facility.
- Conducted an audit of the facility’s crash carts to ensure all required items were present.
- Held an Ad Hoc QAPI meeting with the Executive Director, Director of Clinical Services, and Medical Director.
- Placed overhead paging system instructions by telephones at the nurse’s station, reception area, and dining room with instructions on how to page overhead.
- Reviewed facility deaths to ensure residents’ advance directives were followed related to code status.
- Completed an audit of licensed nurse licensure and verified cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) cards were valid.
- Implemented a requirement that all new employees participate in a Code Blue drill upon hire.
- Implemented a requirement that licensed nursing staff sign an Honoring Advance Directive Attestation upon hire.
- Educated facility staff on Resident Rights, including the right to choose code status.
- Educated licensed staff on honoring advance directives, timeliness of initiating CPR, following physician orders, and the code blue process.
- Provided all-staff education on abuse, neglect, and exploitation.
- Provided all-staff Resident Rights education.
- Provided licensed nursing staff education on honoring advance directives, physician orders, timeliness of initiating CPR, and the code blue process.
- Conducted code blue quality assurance drills.
- Implemented a requirement that licensed nurses will not work prior to attending a mock code blue quality assurance drill.
- Conducted staff interviews to verify knowledge of facility policies regarding code status, roles during a code blue, and where to find advance directives, and confirmed staff received abuse and neglect training.
Failure to Honor Full Code Status and Initiate Timely CPR
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to honor a cognitively intact resident’s clearly documented Full Code status and to initiate CPR when the resident was found unresponsive. The resident had multiple medical diagnoses including type 2 diabetes, atrial fibrillation, abnormal gait, blindness in the right eye, shortness of breath, muscle wasting, mood disorder, and hypertension. On admission and throughout the stay, documentation in the EMR, physician orders, nursing assessments, care plan, and an APRN advance care planning note consistently identified the resident as Full Code, with the resident verbalizing understanding of Full Code versus DNR and electing Full Code. A 5‑day MDS showed intact cognition (BIMS 14), and progress notes shortly before the event documented the resident as clinically stable, at baseline, and continuing as Full Code. On the morning of the incident, a CNA assigned to the resident reported finding him unresponsive close to 6:00 a.m. and notified the LPN assigned to him. Another CNA reported being told around 5:30 a.m. that the resident was not responding and, upon entering the room, found the resident not breathing and without a pulse, partially hanging off the bed. Both CNAs described that when the LPN arrived, she checked the resident, left to obtain a pulse oximeter, returned with an oxygen saturation reading of 60, and was told by the CNA that there was no pulse and that a code should be called. The CNAs stated that the LPN delayed, left the room again to check code status, then reported the resident was Full Code, but still did not initiate CPR or call a code blue. Instead, the CNAs were sent to get another nurse from another floor, leaving the resident alone in the room during part of this time. The CNAs consistently reported that no staff initiated CPR before EMS arrived. The LPN assigned to the resident stated she found him unresponsive around 6:00 a.m., performed a sternal rub, noted he was not responding and that his feet were cold, and then left the room to call 911 from her personal cell phone and get the crash cart. She acknowledged that she did not start CPR, stating she believed the resident was already dead, that he was a large man, and that she needed a backboard and additional help to move him to the floor, but did not ask the CNAs to assist. She confirmed that no code blue was called and that no CPR was performed by facility staff. Two additional nurses who responded to the room reported they were summoned to “pronounce” a resident, assumed the resident was a DNR based on how the situation was presented, did not independently verify code status before acting, and did not initiate CPR. The RN who arrived stated she called the DON to ask what to do about pronouncing, was told the resident was Full Code and to start CPR, and that at that moment EMS arrived. EMS arrived at approximately 6:09 a.m., confirmed the resident’s Full Code status, questioned why CPR had not been started, and then initiated CPR, which continued for approximately 45 minutes before the resident was pronounced dead. Facility leadership and the Medical Director later confirmed that CPR had not been initiated by staff and that the resident’s Full Code status had not been honored, resulting in a determination of Immediate Jeopardy.
Removal Plan
- Initiated an internal investigation with resident record review, staff interviews, and notification to DCF, AHCA, and local law enforcement.
- Suspended and terminated the assigned nurse and reported the nurse’s license to the licensing board.
- Suspended and terminated two additional nurses who responded to the scene and reported their licenses to the licensing board.
- Completed a facility audit of resident code status preferences and verified that orders and care plans were correct.
- Conducted a 100% audit of the crash carts in the facility to ensure all required items were present.
- Held an Ad Hoc QAPI meeting with the Executive Director, Director of Clinical Services, and at least three other department heads.
- Reviewed facility deaths to ensure residents’ advance directives were followed related to code status.
- Implemented a requirement that licensed nursing staff sign a Honoring Advance Directive Attestation upon hire.
- Educated facility staff on Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation with emphasis on Advance Directives.
- Educated licensed staff on Honoring Advance Directives, timeliness of initiated CPR, following physician orders, and the Code Blue process.
- Provided all-staff Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation education with 100% completion.
- Provided all-staff Resident Rights education with 100% completion.
- Provided licensed nursing staff education with 100% completion on Honoring Advance Directives, Physicians Orders, timeliness of initiated CPR, and the Code Blue process.
- Conducted Code Blue quality assurance drills.
- Implemented a requirement that licensed nurses will not work prior to attending a mock Code Blue quality assurance drill.
- Interviewed staff members to confirm training and knowledge of code status policies, roles during a Code Blue, and where to find advance directives, and confirmed receipt of abuse and neglect training.