Meadow Creek Post-Acute

In the surveyor’s words

From the most serious findings on record at Meadow Creek Post-Acute, in the surveyor’s own words.

• Immediate jeopardy, widespreadF698Sep 22, 2022

  Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure six of ten sampled residents (Residents 1, 6, 8, 9, 11 and 12), who were receiving [CONDITION(S)] treatments (a life-support treatment that uses a special machine to filter harmful wastes, salt, and excess fluid from your blood) at their bedside, were provided the care and services consistent with the facility ' s policies and procedures (P&P), professional standards of practice, and the contract between the facility and the [CONDITION(S)] provider. The facility failed to ensure: 1. […]

• Actual harm, isolatedF689Mar 4, 2026

  Based on interview and record review the facility failed to follow its policy and procedure (P&P) titled Safety and Supervision of Residents, which indicated proper resident supervision was a key part of maintaining safety, when a visitor (Family Member [FM] 2), known to pose a safety risk, was unsupervised in the facility for one of three sampled residents (Resident 1).The facility failed to ensure:1) Family Member (FM) 2, who had documented evidence of providing Resident 1 with illicit substances (drugs that are prohibited by law due to their potential for abuse, addiction, and harm) at the current facility and previous facility, was not allowed to visit Resident 1 without staff's supervision on 2/27/2026.2) Facility staff supervised FM 2's visit on 2/27/2026 rather than FM 1, who was… […]

• Actual harm, isolatedF689Sep 17, 2025

  Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident, who used a ventilator (a machine used in healthcare to assist or perform breathing for a patient who cannot breathe adequately on their own), had a functional limitation in range of motion ([ROM] the direction a joint can move to its full potential) to both her upper and lower extremities (arms and legs) and required a two person physical assist with bed mobility, including turning and repositioning, did not sustain a facial injury for one of three sampled residents (Resident 2). The facility failed to: 1. […]

• Actual harm, isolatedF689Aug 7, 2024

  Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the resident, who was assessed as being at risk for falls, did not fall and sustained multiple lacerations (a cut refers to a skin wound) required hospitalization and suturing (stitches that holds wound edges together) for one of three sampled residents (Resident 1). The facility failed to: 1. Ensure Certified Nurse Assistant (CNA 1) asked another staff to assist transferring Resident 1 from a shower chair back to bed via a mechanical lift in attempt to remove linen and the sling from the lift underneath the resident while the resident was positioned too close to the edge of bed. 2. […]

• No harm, potential for more than minimal, widespreadF725Jun 12, 2026

  Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide sufficient licensed nursing staff to meet resident needs, as evidenced by the Facility Assessment (a required, facility wide evaluation used to align the specific needs of the resident population with the facility's resources) identifying a required night shift staffing level of one Registered Nurse (RN) and two Licensed Vocational Nurses (LVNs).This deficient practice resulted in enteral (liquid food) feedings being administered late, medications being administered late, and vital signs not being obtained by nursing staff. These failures had the potential to negatively impact residents' health and safety by delaying necessary treatments, monitoring, and identification of changes in condition. […]