Faubush Family Homes.

“Based on record review and interview, the manager failed to ensure that a resident had a written service plan that when initially developed was signed and dated by the resident or resident's representative, the manager, and the nurse who reviewed the service plan, for one of two residents sampled. The deficient practice posed a risk if the service plan was not developed to articulate decisions and agreements. Findings include:  1. A review of R2's medical record revealed a completed service plan dated February 1, 2025. However, the service plan was not signed and dated by the approving nurse, resident or resident's representative, and the manager.  2. In an interview, E1 acknowledged R2's service plan was not signed and dated by the resident or the resident's representative, the manager, and the nurse who reviewed the service plan.”

“Based on record review and interview, the manager retained a resident who was confined to a bed or chair without meeting the requirements of R9-10-814(B)(2), for one of two residents sampled. The deficient practice posed a risk if the facility was unable to meet a resident's needs. Findings include:  1. R9-10-814(B)(2) states, "A manager of an assisted living facility authorized to provide personal care services may accept or retain a resident who is confined to a bed or chair because of an inability to ambulate even with assistance if: the resident's primary care provider... examines the resident... at least once every six months throughout the duration of the resident's condition; reviews the assisted living facility's scope of services; and signs and dates a determination stating that the resident's needs can be met by the assisted living facility..." 2. A review of R1's service plan (dated February 1, 2025) revealed that R1 received personal care services and was confined to a bed or chair.  3. A review of R1's medical record revealed a determination for continued residency dated August 28, 2023. However, no further documentation was available for Compliance Officer review.  4. In an interview, E1 acknowledged R1's medical record did not include the required determination per R9-10-814(B)(2) updated at least once every six months.”

“Based on record review, observation, and interview, the manager failed to ensure that a medication administered to a resident was administered in compliance with a medication order for one of two residents sampled. The deficient practice posed a risk if the resident experienced a change in condition due to improper administration of medication. Findings include:  1. A review of R2’s medical record revealed a medication order for Amlodipine 5 milligrams (mg), 1 tablet by mouth (po) twice a day (bid). 2. A review of R2’s medication administration record (MAR) for June 2025 revealed R2 was administered Amlodipine 10 mg, 1 tablet po once a day (qd). 3. While on-site for the compliance inspection, the Compliance Officer observed Amlodipine 10 mg stored at the facility for administration to R2. 4. In an interview, E1 acknowledged that medication administered to R2 was not administered in compliance with a medication order.”

“Based on observation and interview, the manager failed to ensure that a life preserver or shepherd's crook was available in the swimming pool area. Findings include: 1. While on-site for the compliance inspection, the Compliance Officer observed the facility's backyard, which included a swimming pool. However, a life preserver or shepherd's crook was unavailable. 2. In an interview, E1 acknowledged a life preserver or shepherd's crook was not available in the swimming pool area.”