Timberland Ridge: Resident Left Without Care All Day - OH

The resident's family member contacted the facility on July 14 to complain that their loved one "did not receive any care" during his stay. The administrator launched an investigation but could not identify a single staff member who had provided incontinence care to the resident during the July 12 shift in question.

What investigators uncovered was a communication breakdown that left Resident #9 essentially invisible to the nursing staff for an entire work period. Two certified nursing assistants each thought the other was responsible for his care. Neither checked on him beyond what was absolutely required.

The confusion centered on room assignments. CNA #842 told investigators during an August 8 interview that at the beginning of the July 12 shift, staff discussed that CNA #805 would cover the South hallway and four specific rooms on a different hall. One of those four rooms housed Resident #9.

But CNA #842 said the resident's call light never activated during the shift. She denied providing any incontinence care to him.

Meanwhile, the licensed practical nurse working that day, LPN #887, entered Resident #9's room three times to administer medication and provide tracheostomy care. The nurse asked if the resident needed anything else, and he blinked twice to indicate no.

That was the extent of his interaction with nursing staff.

LPN #887 explained during an August 7 interview that monitoring the CNAs was difficult because the hall had a heavy medication schedule that demanded constant attention. The nurse did not provide incontinence care, leaving that responsibility to the CNAs who were supposed to be assigned to the resident's room.

The facility's own policy on perineal care, dated October 2, 2007, states the purpose is "to provide care to genitalia and rectal area, to prevent broken skin and infection, to provide comfort and cleanliness, and prevent body odors."

None of that happened for Resident #9 on July 12.

The administrator's investigation revealed that the CNAs involved would not have intentionally failed to provide care. But intention mattered little when the result was a resident left without basic hygiene assistance for an entire shift.

The communication failure that led to this neglect appears to have been systemic rather than isolated. Federal inspectors noted that this deficiency was investigated under four separate complaint numbers, suggesting multiple incidents or ongoing concerns about care coordination at the facility.

Resident #9 required tracheostomy care, indicating significant medical needs that would have made proper hygiene and comfort measures particularly important. Patients with tracheostomies often have limited mobility and communication abilities, making them more dependent on nursing staff for all aspects of personal care.

The facility policy emphasized preventing skin breakdown and infection through proper perineal care. For medically complex patients like Resident #9, prolonged exposure to moisture and waste can lead to serious complications including pressure ulcers, urinary tract infections, and skin deterioration.

The missed care occurred despite multiple opportunities for staff to identify the problem. LPN #887 made three separate visits to the resident's room but focused only on medical tasks, not basic comfort needs. The nurse's acknowledgment that monitoring CNAs was difficult suggests potential understaffing or workload issues that contributed to the oversight.

CNA #842's statement that the resident's call light never activated raises additional questions about the facility's monitoring procedures. Residents who cannot effectively communicate their needs or operate call systems require more proactive checking, not less.

The investigation's findings highlight how easily vulnerable residents can fall through cracks in care when communication systems break down. What should have been a routine room assignment discussion became a critical failure that left a medically fragile resident without basic dignity and comfort for hours.

The family member's complaint on July 14 came two days after the incident, suggesting the effects of the missed care may have been apparent to visitors even if staff failed to recognize the problem in real time.

Federal inspectors classified this as causing minimal harm or potential for actual harm to few residents. But the violation represents exactly the kind of basic care failure that families fear most when placing loved ones in nursing facilities.

The administrator's conclusion that staff would not intentionally neglect residents offers little comfort when the result is the same regardless of intent. Effective care requires systems that prevent such breakdowns, not just good intentions from individual workers.

The multiple complaint numbers associated with this deficiency suggest this may not have been an isolated incident at Timberland Ridge. When similar problems generate multiple federal investigations, it indicates deeper systemic issues with care coordination and staff communication.

For Resident #9, the investigation came too late to undo the hours spent in discomfort and undignified conditions. The facility's 2007 policy on perineal care remained posted on the walls while the actual care it described failed to reach a resident who needed it most.

Full Inspection Report

The details above represent a summary of key findings. View the complete inspection report for Timberland Ridge Nursing & Rehabilitation from 2025-08-12 including all violations, facility responses, and corrective action plans.

Additional Resources

• View all inspection reports for Timberland Ridge Nursing & Rehabilitation
• Browse all OH nursing home inspections