Parkwood Village

In the surveyor’s words

From the most serious findings on record at Parkwood Village, in the surveyor’s own words.

• Immediate jeopardy, patternF880Oct 6, 2021

  Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to maintain infection control procedures designated to provide a safe environment to help prevent the development and transmission of COVID-19 for 17 of 18 (Resident #2, Resident #3, Resident #4, Resident #5, Resident #6, Resident #7, Resident #8, Resident #9, Resident #10, Resident #11, Resident #12, Resident #13, Resident #14, Resident #15, Resident #16, Resident #17, and Resident #18) residents reviewed for infection control. 1. The facility failed to screen staff and visitors for temperature, signs and symptoms of Covid 19, and close contact with someone known to have Covid 19. 2. The facility failed to quarantine residents with known close exposure. 3. […]

• No harm, potential for more than minimal, widespreadF812Oct 6, 2022

  Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food safety in the facility's only kitchen. 1. The facility failed to ensure food items and clean dishes were kept away from airborne contaminants. 2. The Facility failed to ensure food items were properly labeled, dated, and thawed in accordance with professional standards. These failures could place residents who receive food from the kitchen, at risk for food contamination and food-borne illness. Findings included: Observation on 10/04/2022 at 9:15 AM revealed, a large fan on the floor inside the entrance to the kitchen. The fan was blowing toward a food preparation area of the kitchen. […]

• No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF627Aug 18, 2026

  Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure the transfer or discharge is documented in the resident's medical record by the attending physician for 4 of 8 residents (Resident #2, Resident #5, Resident #6, and Resident #8) reviewed for discharge planning.The facility failed to have the physician document the basis for transfer or discharge facility for Resident #2, Resident #5, Resident #6, and Resident #8 and the specific needs that could not be met at the facility.This failure could result in inappropriate discharges or transfers, causing physical or mental harm to the residents.Findings included:Record review of Resident #2's Provider Progress Note dated 07/10/2026 9:00am revealed a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. […]

• No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF628Aug 18, 2026

  Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to complete discharge summaries and provide them to 4 of 8 (Resident #2, Resident #5, Resident #6, and Resident #8) at the time of discharge, and failed to notify the Office of the State LTC Ombudsman for 8 of 8 residents (Resident #1, Resident #2, Resident #3, and Resident #4, Resident #5, Resident #6, Resident #7, and Resident #8) reviewed for discharge planning.The facility failed to have the physician include a recapitulation of the resident's stay in the medical records of Resident #2, Resident #5, Resident #6, and Resident #8.The facility failed to send a copy of the notice of discharge to a representative of the Office of the State LTC Ombudsman for Resident #1, Resident #2, Resident #3, Resident #4, Resident #5, Resident… […]

• No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF677Mar 20, 2026

  Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident who is unable to carry out activities of daily living receives the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene for 2 of 6 residents (Residents #23 and #63) reviewed for ADL care.The facility failed to answer Resident #23 and Resident #63 call lights in a timely manner.This failure could place residents at risk for complications associated with delayed care such as skin breakdown and dignity issues.Findings included:Record review of Resident #23's face sheet reflected she was an [AGE] year-old female with an initial admission date to the facility of 02/19/2025. […]