Rego Park Nursing Home

In the surveyor’s words

From the most serious findings on record at Rego Park Nursing Home, in the surveyor’s own words.

• No harm, potential for more than minimal, widespreadF725Oct 16, 2024

  Based on record review and interviews conducted during the Recertification Survey from 10/08/2024 to 10/16/2024, the facility did not ensure sufficient nursing staff were available to provide nursing and related services to assure resident safety and attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident. Specifically, the facility reported short staffing on weekends confirmed by a review of the Daily Staffing and the Payroll Based Journal Staffing Data Report. The findings are: The facility was not able to provide a policy related to facility staffing. The Payroll Based Journal Staffing Data Report for the 3rd quarter of 2024 (04/01/2024 - 06/30/2024) documented that excessively low weekend staffing was triggered. […]

• No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF582Oct 16, 2024

  Based on record review and interviews conducted during the Recertification Survey from 10/08/2024 to 10/16/2024, the facility did not ensure a resident, or their designated representative was provided appropriate notification at the termination of Medicare Part A benefits. This was evident in 3 (Residents #46, #294, and #295) of 3 residents reviewed for Beneficiary Notification. Specifically, the facility did not provide the Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage for Medicare Part A at least two calendar days before Medicare covered services ended as required, did not ensure that notices were mailed on the same day telephone notification was made, and did not provide the Skilled Nursing Facility Advance Beneficiary Notice of Non-Coverage form for residents after discharge from skilled services. […]

• No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF657Apr 9, 2021

  Based on record review and staff interview during the Recertification and Abbreviated survey (NY 390), the facility did not ensure that: residents' Comprehensive Care Plans (CCPs) were reviewed and revised after a Fall; and the facility did not ensure cognitively intact cognitively intact residents were invited to participate in the development of their plan of care. Specifically: (1) The residents' CCPs were not reviewed and revised to determine effectiveness of interventions and include new interventions after falls (Resident #51 and #115). (2) Residents were not invited to participate in the care plan meeting (Resident #31 and #48). This was evident for 4 out of 35 residents reviewed in the investigation sample (Resident #s 51, 115, 31, and 48). […]

• No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF880Apr 9, 2021

  Based on observations and interviews conducted during the Recertification survey, the facility did not ensure that infection control practices and procedures were maintained. Specifically, (1) A nurse was observed administering eye drop during medication pass without wearing gloves; (2) oxygen tubing was observed on the floor; and (3) Staff were observed assisting multiple residents without performing hand hygiene between residents or after touching dirty items during the dining preparation and service. This was evident for 1 of 4 residents observed for Med Admin; 2 of out of 31 residents reviewed in the investigation Sample; and random observations on 1 out of 4 units observed for Dining (Unit 6). […]

• No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF657Apr 8, 2021

  Based on record review and staff interview during the Recertification and Abbreviated survey (NY00273390), the facility did not ensure that: residents' Comprehensive Care Plans (CCPs) were reviewed and revised after a Fall; and the facility did not ensure cognitively intact cognitively intact residents were invited to participate in the development of their plan of care. Specifically: (1) The residents' CCPs were not reviewed and revised to determine effectiveness of interventions and include new interventions after falls (Resident #51 and #115). (2) Residents were not invited to participate in the care plan meeting (Resident #31 and #48). This was evident for 4 out of 35 residents reviewed in the investigation sample (Resident #s 51, 115, 31, and 48). […]