Deer Crest Senior Living

Survey completed January 27, 2022: 7 correction orders

• Tag 480: 144G.41 Subd 1 (13) (i) (B) Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
  Details

  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code.

  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code. This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety) and was issued at a widespread scope (when problems are pervasive or represent a systemic failure that has affected or has the potential to affect a large portion or all the [...]”

  Rule cited: “(13) offer to provide or make available at least the following services to residents: (i) at least three nutritious meals daily with snacks available seven days per week, according to the recommended dietary allowances in the United States Department of [...]”

• Tag 570: 144G.42 Subdivision 1 Display of license Level 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
  Details

  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to display the original, current license at the main entrance of the assisted living facility.

  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to display the original, current license at the main entrance of the assisted living facility. This had the potential to affect all the licensee's 77 residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”

  Rule cited: “The original current license must be displayed at the main entrance of each assisted living facility. The facility must provide a copy of the license to any person who requests it.”

• Tag 1730: 144G.71 Subd. 5 Individualized medication management plan Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
  Details

  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the medication management plan had all required content to include description of storage of medications based on resident needs and preferences, for 5 of 6 residents (R2, R3, R4, R5 and R7) who received medication management services with records reviewed.

  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the medication management plan had all required content to include description of storage of medications based on resident needs and preferences, for 5 of 6 residents (R2, R3, R4, R5 and R7) who received medication management services with records reviewed. [...]”

  Rule cited: “(a) For each resident receiving medication management services, the assisted living facility must prepare and include in the service plan a written statement of the medication management services that will be provided to the resident. [...]”

• Tag 1750: 144G.71 Subd. 7 Delegation of medication administration Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
  Details

  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse documented resident-specific instructions for their medications for two of five residents (R2, R3) whose medication administration was delegated to unlicensed personnel.

  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse documented resident-specific instructions for their medications for two of five residents (R2, R3) whose medication administration was delegated to unlicensed personnel. [...]”

  Rule cited: “When administration of medications is delegated to unlicensed personnel, the assisted living facility must ensure that the registered nurse has: (1) instructed the unlicensed personnel in the proper methods to administer the medications, and the unlicensed [...]”

• Tag 1760: 144G.71 Subd. 8 Documentation of administration of medication Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
  Details

  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure medications were administered as prescribed for two of seven residents (R3, R8) with records reviewed.

  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure medications were administered as prescribed for two of seven residents (R3, R8) with records reviewed. [...]”

  Rule cited: “Each medication administered by the assisted living facility staff must be documented in the resident's record. The documentation must include the signature and title of the person who administered the medication. [...]”

• Tag 2040: 144G.81 Subdivision 1 Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
  Details

  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to conduct a hazard vulnerability or safety risk assessment on or around the facility property.

  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to conduct a hazard vulnerability or safety risk assessment on or around the facility property. This had the potential to directly affect all 77 current residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”

  Rule cited: “An assisted living facility with dementia care that has a secured dementia care unit must meet the requirements of section 144G.45 and the following additional requirements: (1) a hazard vulnerability assessment or safety risk must be performed on and around [...]”

• Tag 2170: 144G.84 SERVICES FOR RESIDENTS WITH DEMENTIA Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
  Details

  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure residents were evaluated for activities according to the licensing rules of the facility and, based on the activity evaluation, the licensee failed to develop individualized activity plans for 4 of 4 residents (R3, R4, R5, R7) who resided in locked, memory-care units with records reviewed.

  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure residents were evaluated for activities according to the licensing rules of the facility and, based on the activity evaluation, the licensee failed to develop individualized activity plans for 4 of 4 residents (R3, R4, R5, R7) who resided in locked, memory-care units with records reviewed. [...]”

  Rule cited: “(b) Each resident must be evaluated for activities according to the licensing rules of the facility. [...]”

From MDH’s letter: no immediate fines.

Allegation, as written: “The alleged perpetrator, an unlicensed caregiver, financially exploited the resident when opioid medications were missing from the resident's supply.”

“The Minnesota Department of Health determined financial exploitation was inconclusive.”

Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: financial exploitation inconclusive.

MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined financial exploitation was inconclusive. The investigation indicated tape was present on the narcotic medication card and a different medication was taped in spaces on the narcotic card, however, it was inconclusive that the alleged perpetrator was the specific person who diverted the narcotic medication. The length of time the tape was reportedly on the back of the narcotic card increased the number of individuals who may have switched out the narcotics.”

Action taken by facility: “The facility completed an internal investigation and alleged perpetrator is no longer employed at facility. The facility reviewed its procedure for medication storage and provided education for unlicensed caregivers to report irregularities such as this right away.”

Action taken by MDH: “No further action taken at this time.”

Survey completed October 15, 2024: no correction orders issued.

Allegation, as written: “The alleged perpetrator (AP) abused the resident when the AP yelled at the resident and slapped the resident on the face during toileting care.”

“The Minnesota Department of Health determined abuse was inconclusive.”

Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: abuse inconclusive.

MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined abuse was inconclusive. The AP denied that she slapped the resident. Although the argument were overheard, no one witnessed the AP slap the resident.”

Action taken by facility: “The facility investigated the incident and provided additional training on reporting abuse. The AP was no longer employed by the facility.”

Action taken by MDH: “No further action taken at this time.”

Survey completed June 7, 2023: no correction orders issued.

Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected the resident when treatment was not provided after a fall with injury.”

“The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was not substantiated.”

Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: neglect not substantiated.

MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was not substantiated. While the resident did have a fall with an injury which was not immediately identified, when the injury was identified the facility sought appropriate care.”

Action taken by facility: “The facility notified the hospice and sent the resident to the hospital.”

Action taken by MDH: “No further action taken at this time.”

Survey completed March 31, 2026: no correction orders issued.