Lake Pleasant Post Acute Rehabilitation Center

In the surveyor’s words

From the most serious findings on record at Lake Pleasant Post Acute Rehabilitation Center, in the surveyor’s own words.

• No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF628Feb 26, 2026

  Based on closed record review, staff interviews, review of facility process and policy the facility failed to ensure that all transfer/discharge notifications were made for one resident (#130). The sample size was four. The deficient practice could lead to notifications and pertinent information regarding the discharge/transfer not being provided.Findings include:Regarding Resident #130 -Resident #130 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of orthopedic aftercare following surgical amputation, anemia, adjustment disorder, muscle weakness, and dysphagia. An admission Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 indicating that the resident is cognitively intact. […]

• No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF812Feb 26, 2026

  Based on observations, staff interviews, review of facility documentation and policies and procedures, the facility failed to ensure that food was prepared, stored, distributed and served in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. The deficient practice could result in food- borne illness.Findings Include: Regarding Kitchen Cleanliness-An initial kitchen observation was conducted on February 23, 2026 at 8:12 A.M. in conjunction with kitchen staff #86. During the initial observation it was observed that floor had several areas of dark matter that appeared to have accumulation in the corners of the tile floor. It was observed that a square, depressed area under the dish sink had black matter that appeared wet within its perimeter. […]

• No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF550May 10, 2024

  Based on observations, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide a dignified dining experience to Resident #62, Resident #149, Resident #47 and Resident #42. The facility census was 99. Findings include: Observation was conducted on May 6, 2024 at 8:20 AM of resident dining during breakfast. Observation revealed residents eating breakfast out of Styrofoam containers with plastic cutlery. Multiple residents reported that food has been served that way for a long time and often was cold by the time they received it. Resident #42 stated in an interview on 5/6/24 at 10:18AM that the food was always cold and came in clamshell containers with plastic silverware. […]

• No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF812May 10, 2024

  Based on observation, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure food was stored in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. The deficient practice could contribute to the spread of foodborne illness. Findings include: Upon initial tour of the kitchenon 5/6/24 at 8:20 AM, it was observed that some of the items, such as dry pasta, stored in original bag that had been tied on itself had no additional labeling or dating. Observation in the refrigerator and freezer revealed lack of labeling and dating of items. Most items were observed stored in cardboard boxes. There were no dates or labels on multiple boxes in the refrigerator and no dates on most boxes in the freezer. […]

• No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF692Jan 17, 2024

  Based on clinical documentation, staff interviews, and facility policy and procedures, the facility failed to monitor and maintain acceptable parameters of nutrition for two residents (#12 and #36). The deficient practice could result in a physical and a mental decline in overall health. Findings include: 1) Resident #12 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included quadriplegia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, Type II Diabetes, acute kidney failure, and Schizoaffective Disorder. Review of the percentage meal intake task sheets dated December 27, 2023 through January 15, 2024 revealed that the percentage of meal intake was not documented ten times, and was documented as not applicable six times. […]