Casey, Toomey report reveals nearly 400 troubled nursing homes, 5 in Western Pa. | TribLIVE.com
U.S./World

Casey, Toomey report reveals nearly 400 troubled nursing homes, 5 in Western Pa.

Associated Press
1247346_web1_The-Grove-at-Latrobe
Google
The Grove at Latrobe was named in a federal government report as being one of nearly 400 homes found by inspectors to have serious ongoing health, safety or sanitary problems.
1247346_web1_1247346-97b81ba38e01446b973b7e7408a0aedb
AP
Pennsylvania Sen. Bob Casey, D-Pa.
1247346_web1_1247346-ec1d91a9efd6485f833b588bf14a3260
AP
Pennsylvania Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa.

WASHINGTON — The federal government for years has kept under wraps the names of hundreds of nursing homes around the country found by inspectors to have serious ongoing health, safety or sanitary problems.

Nearly 400 facilities nationwide had a “persistent record of poor care” as of April, but they were not included along with a shorter list of homes that get increased federal scrutiny and do have warning labels, according to a Senate report released Monday.

Two Westmoreland County nursing homes and one Allegheny County facility were among the 16 Pennsylvania nursing homes included on the newly released list: The Grove at Latrobe, with 107 beds; the William Penn Care Center in Penn Township with 155 beds and the Corner View Nursing and Rehabilitation Center in Pittsburgh’s Homewood neighborhood.

Two other Westmoreland County nursing homes——the Twin Lakes Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center in Greensburg, with 137 beds and The Grove at North Huntingdon, with 120 beds— were on a shorter public list of four Pennsylvania nursing homes that have warning labels.

Budget cuts appear to be contributing to the problem by reducing money available for the focused inspections that are required for nursing homes on the shorter list, according to documents and interviews.

The secrecy undermines the federal commitment to ensure transparency for families struggling to find nursing homes for loved ones and raises questions about why the names of some homes are not disclosed while others are publicly identified, according to two senators who released the report on Monday.

“We’ve got to make sure any family member or any potential resident of a nursing home can get this information, not only ahead of time but on an ongoing basis,” said Sen. Bob Casey, D-Pa., who along with Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa., issued the report .

“When a family makes the hard decision to seek nursing home services for a loved one, they deserve to know if a facility under consideration suffers from systemic shortcomings,” said Toomey.

The senators released a list provided them by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, or CMS, of nursing homes with documented problems whose names were not publicly disclosed by the government.

About 1.3 million Americans are nursing home residents, cared for in more than 15,700 facilities. The senators’ report noted that problem nursing homes on both lists account for about 3 percent.

CMS does publicly disclose names of a smaller group of about 80 nursing homes that are getting special scrutiny to help them resolve documented quality problems. They’re in what’s called the Special Focus Facility program. Nursing homes that don’t improve can be cut off by Medicare and Medicaid.

Consumers can identify special focus facilities on the government’s Nursing Home Compare website by looking for an icon shaped like a small yellow triangle that resembles a traffic “caution” sign. The website does not display starred quality ratings for the special focus facilities. Usually, nursing homes receive from a low of one star to the highest quality score of five stars.

The nearly 400 facilities that are candidates for the shorter list “qualify for the program because they are identified as having a ‘persistent record of poor care’ but are not selected for participation as a result of limited resources at (CMS),” said the report from Casey and Toomey.

“Despite being indistinguishable from (special focus nursing homes) in terms of their qualifications, candidates are not publicly disclosed,” the report added.

In a letter last month to Casey, CMS Administrator Seema Verma singled out federal budget problems as a factor.

“The total number of (special focus) slots and total number of (special focus) candidates nationally are based on the availability of federal resources,” Verma wrote. She added that as recently as 2010, there was room for 167 nursing homes in the special focus program and 835 candidates. That’s now down to as many as 88 special focus slots and up to 440 candidates.

She said federal budget cuts in 2014 reduced the number of available slots.

Verma said her agency is evaluating whether it can publicly release the list of “candidate” nursing homes. The Trump administration has asked Congress for more money for health care inspections, but the final amount and how it will distributed remain unclear.

In a statement, CMS said its starred ratings on the Nursing Home Compare website are already the best yardstick “for consumers to understand and use.” About 2,900 nursing homes have the lowest one-star overall rating.

But consumer groups say such ratings are not enough, and greater disclosure is overdue.

“It might help (consumers) avoid facilities that the government is acknowledging are very, very troubled,” said Toby Edelman, a senior policy lawyer with the nonprofit Center for Medicare Advocacy.

A nursing home industry group says it generally supports transparency and takes no position on release of the list. David Gifford, vice president for quality with the American Health Care Association, said the inspection reports on which the CMS lists are based are only one measure, and people should also consider other factors such as staffing levels and clinical outcomes.

Monday’s report from Sens. Casey and Toomey identified several nursing homes from the list of special focus candidates. Among the details:

— In Quitman, Texas, the Heritage Healthcare Residence did not prevent the septic system from backing up, causing a foul-smelling black substance to come through the drains and seep into the kitchen floor near food-preparation areas. In an interview, officials of the company that currently owns the nursing home said they had corrected all the problems after purchasing the facility in February. Suzanne Koenig, president of the company that now runs the nursing home, renamed the Heritage House Healthcare Centre, said she’d be concerned about releasing the list since “it doesn’t really focus on what is going on in the facility.”

— In Ormond Beach, Florida, inspectors found that staff at Avante at Ormond Beach, were not cleaning and disinfecting blood sugar measuring devices between tests of different patients, putting the residents at risk of infection. The same inspection report noted the nursing home quickly started to address the issue. John Hornack, a vice president of the nursing home’s management company, said in an interview the old devices were replaced with new ones and the staff was retrained. Hornack said the problem has now been completely resolved.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.