cms_WV: 8079

In collaboration with The Seattle Times, Big Local News is providing full-text nursing home deficiencies from Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). These files contain the full narrative details of each nursing home deficiency cited regulators. The files include deficiencies from Standard Surveys (routine inspections) and from Complaint Surveys. Complete data begins January 2011 (although some earlier inspections do show up). Individual states are provides as CSV files. A very large (4.5GB) national file is also provided as a zipped archive. New data will be updated on a monthly basis. For additional documentation, please see the README.

This data as json, copyable

rowid facility_name facility_id address city state zip inspection_date deficiency_tag scope_severity complaint standard eventid inspection_text filedate
8079 EASTBROOK CENTER LLC 515089 3819 CHESTERFIELD AVENUE CHARLESTON WV 25304 2013-10-22 152 D 1 0 KE9711 **NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the resident's legal representative was permitted to make medical decisions on behalf of one (1) of five (5) residents reviewed. The health care surrogate (HCS) for Resident #66 was unaware of the facility's decision to transport the resident to an out of state facility for treatment of [REDACTED]. Resident identifier: #66. Facility census: 121. Findings include: a) Resident #66 Medical record review found the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Admitting [DIAGNOSES REDACTED]. Upon admission to the facility, the resident had HCS which was appointed during her stay at the referring hospital. Further review of the medical record revealed the resident was transferred and admitted to an out of state hospital's psychiatric unit for treatment of [REDACTED]. On the day of discharge (09/30/13), only three (3) entries were recorded in the resident's computerized medical record. -- The first entry was written at 2:15 p.m., (Name of health care surrogate) aware of new order to send resident to (name of hospital) for evaluation. -- The second entry was made at 3:59 p.m. by a facility social worker, Employee #80 which stated, A referral was made to (name of facility), there are no openings at the current time, requested documents will be faxed for review. A referral was made to (another name of a facility) documents will be faxed for review. A referral was made to (name of a third facility) documents will be faxed for review. Two (2) of these three (3) referrals were made to out of state facilities. -- The third entry, on 09/30/13 was made at 4:12 p.m., (Name of ambulance service) here to transport resident to (name of the state). Resident and family aware. (Note: The resident's legal representative was not a family member.) On 10/21/13 at 12:05 p.m., the director of nursing (DON) was asked how the HCS was notified regarding the transfer of Resident #66. The DON stated the facility corresponded with the HCS surrogate by e-mail. She provided a copy of the e-mail correspondence on 09/30/13. The DON stated the resident had exhibited inappropriate sexual behaviors over the weekend which prompted the transfer on Monday, 09/30/13. The e-mail message sent to the HCS at 12:45 p.m. on 09/30/12 was, (Resident's initials) new order for psych consult at (name of hospital) in (name of state). The HCS was interviewed by telephone on 10/21/13 at 2:30 p.m. The HCS stated the e-mail did not explain the resident was being admitted to an out of state facility on 09/30/13. She said she believed a psych consult would be completed in house by a psychiatrist, as that was the procedure in the past. She was also unaware the resident was exhibiting any inappropriate sexual behaviors. The HCS stated she had been told the resident had a crush on a male resident. She did not believe a crush, was inappropriate. Further review of the medical record found Employee #60, a facility social worker, had contacted four (4) other area nursing homes in an attempt to make placement arrangements for Resident #66 on 07/31/13. According to the documentation in the medical record, the other facilities did not accept placement of the resident. Employee #60 was interviewed on 10/21/13 at 1:00 p.m. She stated the resident had displayed inappropriate sexual behaviors for some time, but she did not know the actual behaviors that occurred on 09/30/13 because she was not working that day. She stated she had made referrals to other nursing homes for the resident in July 2013, when the sexual behaviors started. Employee #60 was asked to provide verification the HCS was made aware of the placement arrangements and of the inappropriate sexual behavior exhibited by the resident. At the close of the survey on 10/22/13, no further information had been provided. Employee #80, another facility social worker, was interviewed on 10/22/13 at 2:48 p.m., regarding her note written on 09/30/13 at 3:59 p.m. She stated she was told in morning meeting on Monday, 09/30/13, the resident had exhibited sexual behaviors over the weekend and she needed to call some facilities for placement. She verified she did not contact the HCS regarding her efforts at placement. Employee #80 stated she was just calling other facilities because she was told to follow up on referrals made by another social worker. During the telephone interview, on 10/21/13 at 2:30 p.m., the HCS stated she was unaware of referrals being made to other facilities until she spoke with the DON via telephone on 10/02/13. She said she called the facility because the hospital had contacted her about Resident #66. She said she had just become aware the facility was also contacting out of state facilities for placement, and her HCS appointment would not even be recognized in an out of state facility. On 10/22/13, the DON and the administrator were interviewed at 9:30 a.m. The DON verified the facility could not produce evidence the HCS was notified the facility was seeking alternative placement at other facilities and she could not find evidence the HCS was notified of the resident's inappropriate sexual behaviors which the facility stated had occurred. The DON also acknowledged the facility had not documented the sexual behaviors exhibited by the resident that resulted in the resident's hospitalization . 2016-10-01