Paramount Rehab and Nursing Center
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and the state of Washington keep the public informed about the level of care that every nursing facility in the state provides. The government agencies’ efforts involve investigations and surveys performed throughout the year that help identify deficiencies and violations that the Home must correct promptly.
However, some facilities with serious underlying problems require special attention from the government to ensure they maintain the health and well-being of the nursing home’s residents. In these cases, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) designate the Center as a Special Focus Facility to alert the Administrator and nursing staff that changes must occur immediately.
Any failure to do so could negate the Medicare/Medicaid contract or force the nursing facility to sell their operation to another company in good standing.
In recent months, the CMS designated Paramount Rehabilitation & Nursing Center a Special Focus Facility (SFF). The nursing home is now required to follow specific guidelines on improving the substandard level of care they provide.
These better efforts can ensure that every resident’s health and well-being is properly managed. The facility will likely remain on the Federal Watchlist for years to come as investigators and surveyors continually assess the level of care the nursing staff provides. Some of the serious concerns involving violations and deficiencies are listed below. However, there are many more.Paramount Rehabilitation and Nursing Center
This 165-certified Medicare/Medicaid-participating nursing facility provides care and services to the residents of Seattle and King County, Washington. The nursing home is located at:
2611 S. Dearborn
Seattle, WA 98144
When surveyors and investigators identify egregious violations and safety concerns, the regulators can issue monetary fines and instruct the Home to make immediate corrections and adjustments the level of care provided to every resident.
In the last three years, Paramount Rehabilitation and Nursing Center received two monetary penalties including a $287,430 fine on June 24, 2016, and a $50,830 fine on November 8, 2016.
Also, there have been 35 formal filed complaints against the facility in the last three years that resulted in citations. The list of complaints does not include the eight facility-reported issues that also resulted in citations.Current Nursing Home Resident Safety Concerns
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and the state of Washington routinely update the National Medicare.gov database with information concerning violations, citations, and deficiencies at every nursing facility nationwide.
Many individuals and families use this data as an effective way to determine where to place a loved one who requires the highest level of nursing, medical, and hygiene care. The website uses a star rating summary system to be used as a comparative analysis tool.
Currently, Paramount Rehabilitation & Nursing Center maintains a below average two out of five-star rating compared all their facilities in the United States. This ranking includes one out of five stars for health inspections, four out of five stars for staffing, and five out of five stars for quality measures.
Some of the concerns about deficiencies, citations, and violations involved in this facility are listed below.
Failure to Immediately Notify and Consult the Resident’s Physician of a Change in the Resident’s Condition
In a summary statement of deficiencies dated February 7, 2017, the state investigator noted the facility had failed to “consult with the primary physician regarding medication changes for [a resident] reviewed for unnecessary medications.” The state investigator noted that this failure “to notify and consult with a primary physician resulted in [the resident] receiving an antidepressant for over a month, which was contraindicated due to the resident’s medical condition.”
A review of the resident’s Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed the resident was prescribed medication “from an internal meeting” with the facility’s doctor. Another member of the staff also at the meeting “apologized for not informing [the facility’s doctor] when the [resident’s medication] was started.” The doctor identified concern because the medication that the resident was taking “was contraindicated due to the resident’s heart condition.” The facility’s doctor “discontinued [the resident’s unnecessary medication] on January 27, 2017.
The resident’s doctor was interviewed on the morning of February 7, 2017, who stated that “she did not know [the resident] and did not recall prescribing [the medication, stating] it was more likely nursing staff [got the order from another doctor but wrote] my name instead.” That doctor “stated I am always getting mail and lab results for patients that are not mine.” The staff member who attended the meeting stated in an interview conducted on February 7, 2017, that “he thought the Floor Nurse would notify the primary medical doctor of the recommended medication change.”
Failure to Develop, Implement and Enforce Policies That Prevent Mistreatment, Neglect or Abuse
In a summary statement of deficiencies dated February 7, 2017, the state investigator noted the facility’s failure “to implement written policies and procedures, components of identification, through investigation, protection, and reporting of allegations of abuse.” This failure involved two residents at the facility but “placed all residents at risk for abuse.”
One incident involved resident-to-resident altercations. A resident was interviewed who “when asked if staff or another resident had ever abused her” the resident responded “yes, my female friend hit me in the arm twice about a week ago. It hurt a little bit and startled me, but I was not scared.” The resident stated that “she reported the incident to [Social Services].”
A staff member from Social Services “acknowledged that the incident was reported to him by the resident.” The staff member stated that the resident “told me [that her friend] hit her in the arm, so when that happened, I said I could offer [the assaulted resident] a room move to the third floor to ensure they were separated.” The assaulted resident said, “no I don’t want that because I want the second-floor nurse to take care of me.” The assaulted resident then said that “if I have to move, then disregard the incident and don’t do anything.”
The state investigator asked the staff member from Social Services “if he reported the incident or investigated it.” The staff member replied, “No, she told me to disregard it.” As a part of the investigation, the surveyor reviewed the Incident Log on the date in question that revealed “no entry related to [the resident’s] allegation of physical abuse.” Because of that, the investigator interviewed the facility’s Director of Nursing who stated that “she was unaware of the incident, thus, an investigation had not been completed.”
The Director then stated “it was her expectation that when there was an allegation of abuse that the residents were protected, an investigation initiated, the residents placed on alert, assessed for physical and psychosocial harm, and a plan be put in place to prevent recurrence.”
Failure to Provide Care for Residents in a Way the Builds or Maintains Their Dignity and Respect of Individuality
In a summary statement of deficiencies dated February 7, 2017, the State surveyor noted that the facility had failed to “ensure residents received care which upheld their right to dignity. Facility staff failed to ensure residents received dining in a timely and dignified manner.” Also, there was a failure to ensure that “personal care issues were not posted for [a resident]. These failures had the potential to negatively impact the resident’s quality of life and dining experience.”
In one incident, an observation was made of a resident on January 31, 2017, after the lunch hour with “an untouched breakfast tray… sitting next to a urinal full of urine on the ‘over the bed’ table.” The resident was interviewed at that time who stated that “when the staff placed his meals next to a [portable] urinal full of urine, it makes me not want to each my food.” The resident stated “it’s not sanitary. I want them to empty and remove the urinal before they bring my meals into the room.”
Failure to Listen to Residents or Family Groups and Act on Their Complaints or Suggestions
In a summary statement of deficiencies dated February 7, 2017, the state investigator noted the facility’s failure “to develop and implement a system to listen to the views and act upon grievances and recommendations of the residents in the Resident Council Group.” It was noted that this failure “at the facility placed two residents at risk of decreased quality of life and frustration.” Also, “the facility failed to properly resolve agreements for [one resident] reviewed for personal property.”
One resident interviewed by the state investigator on January 27, 2017, when asked “does staff listen to the resident/council’s views and act upon grievances the resident group has filed replied, ‘I think sometimes. A lot of times we keep mentioning the same thing so to me they are not taking care of it.’” A review of the council’s meeting minutes revealed that a resident stated, “staff work short and it takes a long time to get help from the Certified Nursing Assistants.” That resident also stated that “at times his [call] light has been on for an hour before anyone comes to see him.”
Failure to Provide Services That Meet Professional Standards of Quality
In a summary statement of deficiencies dated February 7, 2017, the state investigator noted that the facility had failed “to ensure services were provided that met professional standards of practices for [ten residents at the nursing home]. Nursing staff failed to clarify orders and follow physician’s insulin orders for [seven residents].” The failure by the nursing staff “resulted in an Immediate Jeopardy related to Nursing Professional Standards of practice on February 1, 2017.” It was also noted that the facility “reviewed the physician’s orders of all residents who received insulin and provided training to all licensed nurses, which led to the removal of the Immediate Jeopardy on February 8, 2017.”
However, the investigator noted that the facility failed “to administer medication according to the professional standards of practice, including following non-insulin orders… and ensure site rotations for [six residents]. These failures resulted in residents not receiving medications as ordered and placed residents at risk for unnecessary medications and health complications. Additionally, the facility failed to follow physician’s orders to ensure residents received prescribe medications as intended, resulting in medication errors for [four residents] observed during medication and administration.”
Failure to Provide Residents an Environment Free of Accident Hazards
In a summary statement of deficiencies dated February 7, 2017, it was noted that the facility had failed to “ensure eight current residents reviewed receive the necessary care and services to attain and maintain the highest practicable level of well-being. Failure to adequate positioning was provided for [two residents], and one supplemental resident received services related to non-pressure skin issues …” These “failures placed residents at risk of unmet care needs.”
Additionally, “the facility failed to ensure one resident reviewed for falls with an injury received timely, appropriate care.” The resident “did not receive timely appropriate nursing care after he struck his head during a fall.
Failure to Assist Residents Who Require Help with Heating/Trenching, Grooming, and Personal an Oral Hygiene
In a summary statement of deficiencies dated February 7, 2017, the state investigator noted that the facility had failed to “provide assistance with Activities of Daily Living related to cleansing.” There was also a failure “to provide residents assistance with nail care, bathing, and oral care, placed to residents at risk for poor hygiene, oral health, unsightly nails, embarrassment and diminished quality of life.”
Failure to Ensure That Residents Receive Proper Treatment and Assisted Devices to Maintain Their Hearing Vision
In a summary statement of deficiencies dated February 7, 2017, it was noted that the facility had failed to “ensure residents receive proper treatment and assistive devices to maintain vision.” This failure involved two residents who were “at risk for diminished quality of life.” In one incident, the surveyor interviewed a resident who stated, “I am blind my left I can’t see very well out of my right.” The resident was asked “if she wore glasses. The resident replied “yes, but I don’t have any.” It was noted that no glasses were observed in the resident’s room.
Failure to Provide Adequate Therapy to Prevent the Loss of Range of Motion
In a summary statement of deficiencies dated February 7, 2017, surveyors documented that the facility had failed “to provide necessary care and treatment to prevent a contraction for [a resident]. This failure contributed to [the resident’s] decreased mobility, limited range of motion and pain, which constituted harm.”
Fair to Provide an Environment Free of Accident Hazards and Risks
In a summary statement of deficiencies dated February 7, 2017, was documented that the facility had failed to “ensure residents were safe when smoking. Failure to perform accurate, thorough assessments, or limit initial initiate Care Plans, or implement interventions including safety devices, or provide adequate supervision one residents are smoking.”
If you, or your loved one, suffered an injury in any nursing facility, like Paramount Rehabilitation and Nursing Center, you are likely entitled to file a claim for financial compensation. However, these cases are typically extremely complex and required skills of a competent nursing home negligence attorney who specializes in abuse and neglect cases.
No upfront fees are required because these cases are handled through contingency fee arrangements. These agreements allow immediate legal access, advice, counsel, and representation to build a case for monetary recovery. The legal services are paid only after the case has been successfully resolved through a jury trial award, or negotiated an out-of-court settlement.