Cura of Sauk Centre

In the surveyor’s words

From the most serious findings on record at Cura of Sauk Centre, in the surveyor’s own words.

• Actual harm, isolatedF760Apr 10, 2025

  Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure medications were administered to the correct resident for 1 of 1 resident (R35) reviewed for medication errors. This failure resulted in actual harm for R35 when she had a fall, sustaining a minor head injury, developed tachycardia (abnormally fast heart rate) and became hypertensive (abnormally high blood pressure) which required ongoing monitoring in the emergency department (ED). The facility had implemented appropriate corrective action prior to the onsite investigation, therefore the deficiency is being cited at past non-compliance. […]

• No harm, potential for more than minimal, widespreadF732Apr 10, 2025

  Based on observation and document review, the facility failed to ensure the required nurse staffing information was posted daily for 3 of 3 days reviewed. This had the potential to affect all 48 residents residing in the facility, visitors and staff who may wish to view the information. Findings include: During observation on 4/7/25 at 11:32 a.m., the nurse staffing information was posted on wall inside the entrance of the facility. However, the posted nurse staffing information was dated for 4/7/25 and 4/8/25. Posting did not include the facility name, current census and had inaccurate information posted. […]

• No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF776Jan 29, 2025

  Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to provide timely results of x-rays services for 3 of 3 residents (R1, R2, R3) reviewed for timely diagnostic services. Findings include: R1's significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R1 had diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease. R1's MDS indicated R1 had severe cognitive impairment with memory loss and a history of falls. R1's care plan dated 12/10/24, indicated R1 had a history of falls. On 1/7/25 at 4:46 a.m., a progress note indicated R1 had an unwitnessed fall with a 1.5 centimeter (cm) x 1.5 cm laceration noted to the left side of her head. On 1/8/25 at 9:41 a.m., a progress note indicated R1 had swelling to her left forearm. R1 was observed to use her left hand less than usual. […]

• No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF688Aug 19, 2021

  Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to provide restorative nursing programs as care planned to maintain abilities for 5 of 5 residents (R28, R40, R18, R20 and R4) reviewed who were to receive a restorative nursing program. Findings include: R28's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], included cognitively intact with a diagnoses [MEDICAL RECORD OR PHYSICIAN ORDER] . R28 required extensive assistance with transfers, did not ambulate at all in the corridor, but ambulated in room once or twice with one person physical assistance during the look back period. R28 did not receive any therapy, nor did she receive any restorative nursing program. […]

• No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF550Mar 5, 2026

  Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident was treated with dignity and respect for 1 of 3 residents (R26) reviewed for dignity.Findings include:R26's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], identified R26 had severe cognitive impairment and required assistance with all activities of daily living (ADLs). R26's diagnoses included non-traumatic brain dysfunction (impaired brain function not caused by a physical injury), arthritis (inflammation of the joints causing pain and stiffness), Alzheimer's disease (a progressive brain disorder that causes memory loss and cognitive decline), and spinal stenosis (narrowing of the spinal canal that can cause pain or nerve pressure). […]