Finding Description
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 6. Review of the medical record for Resident #49 revealed an admission date of 01/31/25 with diagnoses including heart failure, chronic respiratory failure, kidney failure, obesity and cirrhosis of the liver.
Review of the physician's orders for Resident #49 revealed a treatment order for Triad Hydrophilic Wound Dress External Paste (debriding paste utilized as a wound dressing), apply to buttock topically two times a day dated 02/26/25. There were no orders for Resident #49 to be on EBP (gown and gloves) during care.
Observation on 03/12/25 at 2:33 P.M. of wound care to Resident #49 with NP #364 (wound nurse) and the DON revealed he had a Stage III pressure ulcer to Resident #49's right buttock. NP #364 and DON washed their hands prior to wound care and donned gloves. There were no gowns available in the room, and there was no sign on the door revealing Resident #49 was on EBP.
Interview on 03/12/25 at 3:40 P.M. with the DON verified Resident #49 did not have an order for EBP, but he should have had one due to the Stage III pressure ulcer to his right medial buttock.
Review of the facility policy titled, Transmission Based Precautions dated 05/01/22 revealed EBP should be implemented for high contact resident care activities that provide opportunities for transfer of MDRO's to staff hands and or clothing. The use of gown and gloves for high contract resident care activities was indicated when contact precautions would not apply otherwise for nursing homes residents with wound and/or indwelling medical devices regardless of MDRO colonization as well as residents with MDRO infection or colonization. Examples of high contact resident care activities requiring gown and gloves are providing hygiene, device care such as urinary catheter and wound care.
7. Review of the medical record for Resident #11 revealed an admission date of 01/25/17 with diagnoses including dementia with behavioral disturbance and non-compliance.
Review of the physician's orders for March 2025 revealed an order initiated on 11/26/24 for hospice was to change Resident #11's wound dressings on Tuesdays and Thursdays on night shift. On 02/26/25 an order was initiated for staff to apply Skin Prep (forms a film to protect the skin by reducing friction) daily to the right side of the foot and then leave the foot in the boot at bedtime for wound care.
Observation on 03/12/25 at 2:33 P.M. of wound care with the DON and NP #364 (wound nurse) to Resident #11's right lateral foot. During the dressing change and assessment, NP #364 removed Resident #11's dressing, removed the scab to the wound, measured the wound and then applied Skin Prep via wipe. NP #364 then placed a dry dressing over the wound. NP #364 was asked if the Skin Prep was a cleansing agent, and she verified it was not a cleansing agent but was like a liquid band-aid. NP #364 stated the wound had been cleaned during the last dressing change earlier in the night or day shift.
Interview on 03/12/24 at 3:40 P.M. with the DON verified NP #364 did not cleanse Resident #11's right lateral foot wound during the dressing change.
Review of the facility policy titled, Wound Care dated 05/01/22 revealed the facility would ensure all residents skin conditions were properly tracked and cared for.
8. Review of the medical record for Resident #204 revealed an admission date of 03/03/25 with diagnoses including paranoid schizophrenia, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, Alzheimer's disease and dementia.
Review of Resident #204's nursing admission assessment dated [DATE] revealed he had an indwelling Foley catheter in place. There was no documentation related to Resident #204 needing to be placed on EBP.
Observation on 03/12/25 at 10:40 A.M. of care to Resident #204 by CNA #305 and CNA #353 revealed he had an indwelling Foley catheter. CNA #305 and CNA #353 washed their hands, donned gloves and then provided Foley catheter care to Resident #204. There were no gowns available in the room and there was no sign on the door revealing Resident #204 was on EBP. Both CNA #305 and CNA #353 verified Resident #204 was not on EBP
Interview on 03/12/25 at 11:30 A.M. with the Administrator verified Resident #204 was not on EBP but he should have been due to having an indwelling Foley catheter.
Review of the facility policy titled, Transmission Based Precautions dated 05/01/22 revealed EBP should be implemented for high contact resident care activities that provide opportunities for transfer of MDRO's to staff hands and/or clothing. The use of gown and gloves for high contract resident care activities was indicated when contact precautions would not apply otherwise for nursing homes residents with wound and/or indwelling medical devices regardless of MDRO colonization as well as residents with MDRO infection or colonization. Examples of high contact resident care activities requiring gown and gloves are providing hygiene, device care such as urinary catheter and wound care.
9. Review of four out of six new employee personnel files revealed the facility was not ensuring staff were given a purified protein derivative (PPD) test (test for tuberculosis) on hire. The Administrator, Housekeeping Supervisor #306, Activities Director #330 and Receptionist #335 tuberculosis screenings were blank or not in their files.
Interview on 03/18/25 at 1:04 P.M. with COO #300 verified the Administrator, Housekeeping Supervisor #306, Activities Director #330 and Receptionist #335 did not have tuberculosis screening on hire.
The facility was unable to provide a tuberculosis screening policy for staff.
This deficiency represents noncompliance investigated under Master Complaint Number OH00163232 and Complaint Number OH00162361.
Based on record review, observations, interviews, review of hospital discharge summaries, review of the Ohio Department of Health (ODH) Ohio Disease Reporting System (ODRS), review of the Summit County Public Health (SCPH) Public Health Nurse (PHN) communications, and facility policy review, the facility failed to develop, maintain, and implement an effective infection control program. This had the potential to affect all 54 residents residing in the facility.
The failed to follow the local health department's directives for Resident #24 with a MDRO. This affected one resident (#24) of one resident reviewed for a MDRO and had the potential to affect all residents.
The facility failed to ensure infection control tracking was not complete or accurate. This had the potential to affect all residents.
The facility failed to have effective COVID-19 outbreak testing, or infection surveillance for staff and residents. The affected 20 residents (#2, #9, #11, #16, #18, #21, #22, #31, #35, #36, #37, #38, #40, #41, #42, #43, #44, #46, #47, and #55) and had the potential to affect all residents.
The facility failed to have an effective legionella water management program. This had the potential to affect all residents.
The facility failed to ensure EBP, transmission-based precautions (TBP) and/or contact precautions were in place for Residents #10, #14, #25, #30, #38, #49, and #204. This affected seven residents (#10, #14, #25, #30, #38, #49, and #204) of 12 residents reviewed for infection control and had the potential to affect all residents.
The facility failed to ensure maintain proper infection control practices while providing wound care for Resident #11. This affected one resident (#11) of two residents reviewed for wound care.
The facility failed to ensure tuberculosis screening upon hire for four employees (Administrator, Housekeeping Supervisor #306, Activities Director #330 and Receptionist #335) of ten employee personnel files reviewed. This had the potential to affect all residents.
Findings include:
1. Review of the medical record for Resident #24 revealed admission date of 06/04/24 with diagnoses including dementia with psychotic disturbance, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, lymphedema, Parkinson's disease, anxiety disorder, and atherosclerotic heart disease.
Review of a nurses note dated 11/05/24 revealed Resident #24 stated he was not feeling well. Resident #24 had a temperature of 101.4 degrees Fahrenheit (F), blood pressure of 132/87, oxygen saturation of 93 percent, and heart rate of 117. Resident #24 was sent to hospital for evaluation.
Review of the hospital Discharge summary dated [DATE] revealed Resident #24 was admitted to hospital from [DATE] to 11/11/24 for sepsis (a life-threatening condition that occurs when the body's immune system overreacts to an infection, leading to widespread inflammation and organ damage). It was noted blood and respiratory cultures had no growth.
Review of a nurses note dated 11/20/24 timed 7:30 A.M. revealed Resident #24 complained of being cold and not feeling well.
Review of a nurse's note dated 11/20/24 timed 1:58 P.M. revealed Resident #24 had a temperature of 99.8 degrees F and symptoms had not improved. Resident #24 was sent to hospital for evaluation.
Review of the hospital Discharge summary dated [DATE] revealed Resident #24 was admitted to hospital from [DATE] to 11/24/24 for cellulitis (an acute bacterial infection of the skin and underlying tissues) of the left lower extremity. Resident #24 admitted for recurrent left lower extremity cellulitis and had previously been admitted from 11/05/24 to 11/11/24. Resident #24 was noted to have Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) growth on the sputum culture, so doxycycline (antibiotic) was added. The sputum culture appeared consistent with colonization (the presence and multiplication of microorganisms on or within a host organism without causing any apparent symptoms or disease).
Review of a Nurse Practitioner (NP) progress note dated 11/25/24 revealed Resident #24 returned from hospital on [DATE] with a diagnosis of cellulitis. The NP noted Resident #24 was discharged on an antibiotic for cellulitis and MRSA in the sputum culture.
Review of a NP progress note dated 12/16/24 revealed Resident #24 completed an oral antibiotic treatment of cephalexin for cellulitis and doxycycline for MRSA of sputum on 12/02/24.
Review of a nurses note dated 02/24/25 revealed Director of Nursing (DON) spoke with Resident #24's daughter regarding concerns about testing. The DON assured Resident #24's daughter the test would be completed, and she would be notified when the sample was sent to the lab. There was no specification regarding what the test was for.
Review of the current physician's orders for March 2025 revealed no evidence Resident #24 had order for enhanced barrier precautions (EBP) related to MDRO status.
Review of the plan of care for March 2025 revealed no care plan related to infections or MDRO status.
Further review of the medical record for Resident #24 revealed no additional information on Resident #24's MDRO status of colonization.
Review of the undated ODH ODRS report revealed Resident #24 had sputum culture collected on 11/10/24 while at hospital. Results of sputum culture returned on 11/27/24 and were positive for Citrobacter koseri and Klebsiella aerogenes. Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase (KPC) was detected.
Review of the facility infection control logs from November 2024 to February 2025 revealed no evidence Resident #24's MDRO infection was logged, tracked, or monitored.
Review of documented notes from SCPH PHN #370 revealed:
•
On 12/04/24 PHN #370 contacted the hospital requesting labs and provider notes with information on Resident #24's location of residence.
•
On 12/10/24 PHN #370 attempted phone contact to facility without success.
•
On 12/18/24 PHN #370 attempted phone contact to facility without success.
•
On 12/27/24 PHN #370 attempted phone contact to facility. PHN #370 was able to obtain DON's email address and email communication was sent.
•
On 01/07/25 PHN #370 had not received response to email to DON. A follow-up call was placed to facility and voicemail was left for Admissions/Social Service Designee (SSD) #355. SSD #355 returned phone call and confirmed Resident #24 had not been in EBP. PHN #370 provided education on colonization screening and would send follow up email with more information. DON returned call to PHN #370 and was also educated on EBP and screening needs.
•
On 01/15/25 PHN #370 had not received follow up from facility on initiating colonization screening. PHN #370 left voicemail for SSD #355.
•
On 01/17/25 PHN #370 was contacted by Chief Operating Officer (COO) #300. PHN #370 forwarded email with screening recommendations, swab request form, and education.
•
On 01/27/25 PHN #370 had not received screening request forms and placed follow up call to COO #300 without successful contact.
•
On 02/04/25 PHN #370 had not received follow up for screening from facility. SCPH Medical Director called facility and spoke with the Administrator. The Administrator indicated the facility was having turnover and requested email be forwarded to her.
•
On 02/12/25 PHN #370 received a request for testing kits from DON.
•
On 02/28/25 PHN #370 noted the facility was scheduled to perform screening on 02/17/25; however. No results had returned. PHN #370 followed up with lab and discovered no specimens were received from facility.
Review of email communication dated 12/27/24 at 3:01 P.M. from SCPH PHN #370 addressed to Registered Nurse (RN)/Former DON #313 revealed PHN #370 notified facility of Resident #24 was reported to SCPH for a carbapenemase producing organism (CPO) and PHN #370 requested more information. It was noted Resident #24 should be on EBP.
Review of email communication dated 01/07/25 at 2:56 P.M. from SCPH PHN #370 addressed to Former DON #313 and SSD #355 revealed PHN #370 provided educational materials and instructions for Carbapenemase Producing Carbapenem Resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CP-CRE) screening. PHN #370 indicated Point-Prevalence Screening (PPS) should be completed on Resident #24's unit. Resident #24 was identified as the index case and should be on EBP. Screenings were by rectal swab and must be completed on an agreed collection date.
Review of email communication dated 01/17/25 at 11:55 A.M. from SCPH PHN #370 addressed to COO #300 revealed PHN #370 forwarded email sent to Former DON #313 and SSD #355.
Review of email communication dated 02/04/25 at 1:41 P.M. from SCPH PHN #370 addressed to the Administrator revealed PHN #370 re-sent email sent to Former DON #313, SSD #355, and COO #300.
Review of email communication dated 02/10/25 at 11:23 A.M. from COO #300 addressed to SCPH PHN #370 revealed COO #300 attached order form for rectal swab test kits with no specification of number of kits needed.
Review of email communication dated 02/12/25 at 10:09 A.M. from Former DON #313 addressed to SCPH PHN #370 revealed Former DON #313 attached consent forms for five swab culture kits.
Review of Laboratory Report dated 03/05/25 revealed a rectal swab was obtained on 02/28/25 for Resident #24 and KPC gene deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) was detected.
Review of Laboratory Report dated 03/05/25 revealed rectal swabs were obtained on 02/28/25 for Residents #34 and #46. Residents #34 and #46 were identified to share a bathroom with Resident #24. Residents #34 and #46's swabs were negative for any detectable genes.
Observation on 03/10/25 at 12:55 P.M. revealed Resident #24 was on EBP.
Observation on 03/11/25 at 5:55 A.M . revealed Resident #24 was changed to contact precautions.
Interview on 03/11/25 at 9:55 A.M. with PHN #370 revealed the facility had been difficult to contact and did not complete screening as scheduled. PHN #370 indicated Resident #24 was the index case and due to colonization status needed to be on EBP. PHN #370 indicated screening was necessary to determine if there had been any transmission.
Interview on 03/11/25 at 11:53 A.M. with the DON confirmed she had changed Resident #24 from EBP to contact precautions as she had noticed report of CRE in sputum. DON indicated she became aware of the issue in a care conference with Resident #24's daughter. The DON indicated in her investigation she realized the facility had been contacted by SCPH, and there were required screenings to be done. She collected the samples and got the swabs sent out for testing.
Interview on 03/11/25 at 1:59 P.M. with SSD #355 revealed she became involved with SCPH via phone. SSD #355 indicated the DON was on vacation and she took a message. SSD #355 indicated she relayed all information to COO #300.
Interview on 03/11/25 at 2:13 P.M. with the Administrator and COO #300 confirmed SCPH had reached out about Resident #24. COO #300 indicated SCPH was working with RN/Former DON #313.
Interview on 03/11/25 at 4:20 P.M. with RN/Former DON #313 revealed she was contacted sometime in January 2025 by SCPH. DON #313 indicated SCPH PHN #370 had emailed her information on EBP and screening that needed done. DON #313 indicated the screening specimens were collected mid-February 2025 and she had left the specimens for the new DON to send out. DON #313 indicated she was unaware of a 02/17/25 testing date with the lab. DON #313 indicated she was on vacation during this time.
Interview on 03/12/25 8:23 A.M. with the DON revealed there had not been any information left for her on swabs or documentation on Resident #24's MDRO status left by Former DON #313. When she became aware, she took action to get test swabs sent to lab to comply with SCPH recommendations. The DON confirmed there was no documentation in Resident #24's medical record on MDRO status or order for EBP.
Review of undated SCPH provided educational document Enhanced Barrier Precautions revealed EBP was recommended for life for diagnosed clinical cases and colonized positive residents of CPOs due to increased risk for transmission. EBP required use of gowns and gloves during high contact patient care activities including dressing, bathing, transfers, hygiene, changing linens, care of or use of medical devices, and wound care.
Review of SCPH provided educational document Facility Guidance for Control of CRE dated November 2015 revealed CDC CRE tool kit was intended for all long-term care facilities. The effort to prevent transmission of resistant organisms could be coordinated by local public health.
Review of the facility policy Screening and Management of Residents with Infections dated 05/01/22 revealed the infection preventionist would maintain a log of residents with current evidence of infection or colonization due to MDRO. Room placement should be considered to prevent placing a resident with MDRO with a resident at high risk for infection. A resident admitted with colonization of MDRO should be reviewed prior to return for details of the status and any possible infection control risks the situation presents.
Review of the facility policy Infection Surveillance dated 10/27/21 revealed cultures may be sent for infections or colonization with epidemiologically important organisms. All MDRO reports required immediate attention to ensure appropriate precautions were in place and notifications were made. The infection control committee would communicate important surveillance data to state and local health departments.
2. Review of infection control logs from January 2024 to December 2024 revealed that starting in June 2024 logs were not completed appropriately to adequately track and trend infections. Identified infections did not include dates of onset, culture or testing results, symptoms, if resident was placed on isolation, or if organisms were sensitive to medications. The Infection Preventionist (IP) had only recorded the residents' name, room number, general infection type and antibiotic ordered. There was no evidence of ongoing analysis of infection data.
Review of the Antibiotic Use Audit Tool for January 2025 and February 2025 revealed COO #300 had audited use of antibiotics for infections. There was no evidence of complete and accurate infection control tracking or trends.
Interview on 03/10/25 at 12:01 P.M. with COO #300 revealed she was unsure if there was a full 12 months of infection control logs. COO #300 indicated she had started an infection control book for January 2025 and February 2025.
Interview on 03/12/25 at 8:23 A.M. with the DON confirmed infection control tracking was not complete or accurate. There was not much available to review for the past 12 months. The facility should be tracking infections on a log and using mapping to identify patterns.
Review of the facility policy Infection Surveillance dated 10/27/21 revealed the infection preventionist was responsible for gathering and interpreting surveillance data. Surveillance data should include identifying information of resident, diagnoses, admission date, date of onset of infection, site of infection, pathogens, risk factors, pertinent remarks on signs and symptoms, if resident was admitted to hospital or other outcomes, and treatment measures and precautions. Monthly data should be collected and entered onto a line listing report then data should be summarized for each nursing unit by site and pathogen. Predominant pathogens or sites should be identified for trending.
3. Observation on 03/10/25 at revealed there were no current residents on isolation for COVID-19.
Interview on 03/11/25 at 11:25 A.M. with COO #300 revealed she was aware there were a few cases of COVID-19 in December 2024 but was trying to get a list from the Former DON #313.
Interview on 03/12/25 at 4:50 P.M. with COO #300 confirmed there was no COVID-19 infection tracking. COO #300 indicated the last outbreak was handled by the Former DON #313 and Former Assistant DON (ADON) #368.
Interview on 03/13/25 at 8:22 A.M. with SCPH Staff #371 revealed she was responsible for COVID-19 tracking in the community. SCPH #371 indicated there was an online form that facilities could fill out weekly for reporting purposes. SCPH #371 indicated they asked facilities to fill out the form even if there were no cases of COVID-19. SCPH #371 indicated the last data submitted for the facility was for 12/04/24. SCPH #371 indicated there had been no data submitted about a COVID-19 outbreak in December 2024. SCPH #371 indicated the facility needed to report COVID-19 cases or outbreaks to be considered compliant.
Interview on 03/13/25 at 12:25 P.M. with Resident #22 confirmed he had COVID-19 in December 2024. Resident #22 stated staff wore appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) while in his room and they moved his roommate to another room.
Despite multiple requests on 03/10/25, 3/11/25, 03/12/25, and 03/13/25 the facility was unable to provide any COVID-19 infection tracking.
On 03/13/25 the surveyor completed a record review of residents residing in the facility. It was discovered that Residents #2, #11, #16, #18, #21, #22, #31, #37, #42, #43, #44, #47, and #55 tested positive for COVID-19 on 12/27/24. Resident #31 tested positive for COVID-19 while in the hospital. It was discovered that Resident #38 tested positive for COVID-19 on 12/30/24. It was discovered that Resident #35 tested positive for COVID-19 on 01/01/25. It was discovered that Residents #9, #40, #41, #46 tested positive for COVID-19 on 01/03/25. There was no evidence able to be obtained on staff positives for COVID-19, and no staff identified themselves as having COVID-19. Residents #9, #16, #35, #40, #41, and #46 had no identified orders for transmission-based precautions (TBP) related to COVID-19 positive status. Residents #21, #22, #37, #42, #47, and #55 TBP orders were added on 12/28/24. Residents #2, #11, #18, #34, #38, #43, and #44 TBP orders were added on 12/30/24. It was discovered that there was no evidence COVID-19 positive Resident #22's roommate COVID-19 negative Resident #36 was moved until 12/30/24.
Attempts on 03/13/25 and 03/17/25 to reach Former DON #313 and Former ADON #368 via phone were unsuccessful.
Interview on 03/17/25 at 8:00 A.M. with Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) #305 and CNA #353 revealed they had not been on the schedule when the COVID-19 outbreak started in December 2024. Both nurse aides recalled there being plenty of PPE and isolation in place for COVID-19 positive residents. Neither CNA #305 or CNA #353 could recall the testing procedures followed during the outbreak.
Interview on 03/17/25 at 9:06 A.M. with Central Supply/Scheduler #338 confirmed there were cases of COVID-19 in December 2024 among staff and residents. Central Supply/Scheduler #338 indicated she knew there was a whole facility round of testing done. Central Supply/Scheduler #338 indicated Former DON #313 and Former ADON #368 were completing the testing. Central Supply/Scheduler #338 indicated she was not sure who the staff were that had COVID-19, and there was no method for monitoring staff illness.
Interview on 03/17/25 at 11:27 A.M. with COO #300, Administrator, and RN/IP #374 revealed RN/IP #374 was not employed by the facility but had been assisting the facility with infection control in interim between IPs. RN/IP #374 indicated she knew there was a COVID-19 outbreak in December 2024. Surveyor identified COVID-19 cases were reviewed with COO #300, Administrator, and RN/IP #374, and COO #300 indicated she did not know there were so many cases. COO #300, Administrator, and RN/IP #374 were unable to provide additional information related to the COVID-19 outbreak, outbreak testing, or infection surveillance.
Interview on 03/17/25 at 2:26 P.M. with NP #363 revealed Resident #31 was sent to the hospital after a fall on 12/26/24. NP #363 indicated they were made aware Resident #31 tested positive for COVID-19 at the hospital and the facility did whole house testing on 12/27/24. NP #363 reported no concerns with COVID-19 management at the facility.
Review of the facility policy COVID-19 Precautions and Prevention dated 10/05/22 revealed the IP should maintain communication and collaboration with state and local health authorities including notification. IP should conduct frequent monitoring and surveillance for new respiratory illnesses. An outbreak would be declared when one case had suspected or confirmed COVID-19, residents with severe respiratory infection resulting in hospitalization or death, or more than three residents or staff display new-onset respiratory symptoms within 72 hours of each other. IP should follow the local health department's recommendations for the next steps on managing a COVID-19 outbreak.
4. Interview on 03/11/25 at 11:25 A.M. with COO #300 revealed she was unable to find the legionella water management program binder.
Interview on 03/11/25 at 1:08 P.M. with Administrator confirmed she was unable to locate any evidence of water management program or evidence of water temperature logs.
The facility provided documents Water Management Plan for Potable Water and policies on Legionella Water Management on 03/12/25.
Interview on 03/17/25 at 11:27 A.M. with Administrator, COO #300, and RN/IP #374 confirmed they were unable to locate any additional information on legionella water management program. COO #300 confirmed provided Water Management Plan for Potable Water and policy for Legionella Water Management did not meet requirements for assessing risk, measures to prevent growth of Legionella in building water systems based on nationally accepted standards, or method for monitoring measures in place.
Review of the undated facility Water Management Plan for Potable Water revealed a section indicating water system was fed bottom-up, potable water system had two loops, there were no holding tanks for potable water, there were two water mains from public water supply with one for potable water and one for sprinkler system, and water mains were equipped with backflow preventers. The plan went on to indicate an environmental assessment would be updated annually and as needed. There was no evidence of an environmental assessment being completed. From the environmental assessment water testing would be completed. There was no evidence of water testing or sampling completed. There was no evidence of lab testing samples.
Review of the facility policy Legionella dated 07/01/23 revealed the facility would establish protocols for prevention and control of transmission of Legionnaire's disease including conducting sampling of potable water per facility's water management plan, disinfecting water distribution system using a high temperature flush, and keeping a log reflecting flushes.
Review of the facility policy Legionella Water Management dated 05/01/22 revealed as part of the facility's infection control program there would be a water management team to oversee water management program. The team would include an infection preventionist, administrator, medical director, director of maintenance, and director of environmental services. The water management program would be based on Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHREA) recommendations. The water management program would include a detailed description and diagram of water system in the facility, identification of areas in water system that could encourage growth and spread, identification of situations that could lead to growth, specific measures used to control, control limits or acceptable parameters, diagram of where control measures are applied, a system to monitor control limits and effectiveness, a plan for when control limits are not met, and documentation of program.
5. Observations on 03/10/25 from 12:18 P.M. to 12:55 P.M. revealed Residents #11, #20, #24, #30, #39, and #43 were identified as on EBP. There was signage for EBP instructions and to see nurse before entering and PPE was available at the entrance to the room. It was not clear which resident in the shared room for Resident #11 and #39 was on EBP. Resident #25 was identified as on contact precautions. There was signage for contact precautions instructions and a door hanger with PPE on the back of the door that contained gloves and red biohazard bags. There were no gowns readily available for Resident #25.
Interview on 03/10/25 at 12:43 P.M. with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #369 revealed she worked for an agency and it was only her second time working at this facility. LPN #369 indicated she was unsure why Resident #25 was on contact precautions.
Follow up tour on 03/10/25 from 4:10 P.M. to 4:18 P.M. the DON revealed that she had been working at the facility for approximately three weeks and verified that she had not yet provided the survey team with the requested list of residents on precautions. She observed Residents #11, #20, #24, #30 and #43 and confirmed the residents were on EBP. The DON observed Resident #25 and confirmed the resident was on contact precautions for a Clostridium difficile (C. diff) infection, but it was cleared now. She indicated the signage needed changed to EBP. The DON confirmed there were no gowns readily available for Resident #25, and she verified Residents #11, #20, #24, #25, #30, and #43 all required EBP or TBP.
Observations on 03/11/25 from 5:45 A.M. to 5:55 A.M. revealed Residents #10, #14, #38, and #204 were newly placed on EBP, and Resident #24 was changed to contact precautions.
Int[TRUNCATED]