Galena Nursing & Rehab: Sexual Abuse Ignored for Days - KS

It wasn't until after 2:00 in the afternoon that the two nurses sat down to assess the resident, identified in inspection records only as R1. By then, the vaginal bruising had darkened. There was extensive bruising across her thighs and her abdomen.

The man who had been present in the room during her intimate cares said nothing and would not make eye contact.

He was still there.

Federal inspectors who visited Galena Nursing & Rehab Center at 1220 E. 8th Street found that staff had observed signs of possible sexual abuse, felt uncomfortable enough to report those concerns to supervisors, and were told to stand down. The inspection, completed March 30, 2026 following a complaint, rated the deficiency at the most serious level of individual harm: actual harm, isolated.

CNA P, one of the nursing assistants who cared for R1, told inspectors she had already raised concerns about the authorized person, referred to in the report as the AP, before the injuries were discovered. The AP was always present in the room, including during intimate cares. CNA P said she felt unsettled performing those cares with him watching from the end of the bed. She reported that concern to the charge nurse. She was told to honor the AP's wishes and let him stay.

So she did.

On March 22, it was CNA O who first flagged that R1 needed to be seen by a nurse. That call went to Licensed Nurse I, who was working the south hall that morning. LN I went to R1's room around 8:00 AM and saw the blood herself, fresh and dried, around the vaginal area. She found LN H, the nurse assigned to R1's hall, and told her what she'd seen. She told her R1 needed a further assessment after cares were completed.

LN H had already taken R1's vital signs that morning. She had not assessed her. She told inspectors she was busy with another resident. She did not remember anything about wounds being reported during shift report.

The assessment didn't happen until after 2:00 PM, six hours after CNA O first raised the alarm.

When LN I and LN H finally examined R1 together that afternoon, they found bruising that had spread and deepened. The vaginal bruising was darker than it had been that morning. The bruising extended across her thighs and abdomen. LN I then reported the situation to Administrative Nurse D.

What happened in the hours between that report and the state agency being notified is not fully detailed in the inspection record. What is documented is that inspectors found the facility had not met the required two-hour reporting window for allegations involving abuse or serious bodily injury.

A nurse named LN G, who had worked an earlier shift, told inspectors a different version of events that began to surface the day after the injuries were found. On March 31, before returning a call to the state agency, LN G said she had spoken to Administrative Staff A and a consultant referred to as HH about the investigation. She then described what she had seen and done.

LN G said CNA M had told her that R1 had bruising running down her right leg. She looked at it herself, with the AP in the room. The AP told her the bruise was from therapy. LN G said she believed it was from the wheelchair. She reviewed the electronic medical record and found the bruise had been noted on March 2. She concluded R1 sat down hard and that was the cause.

She did not order a clinical assessment of the bruise. She did not flag it as a potential injury.

Earlier in that same shift, LN G said, the AP had told her that R1 had scratched her vaginal area and had a yeast infection. LN G gave CNA M antifungal cream and told him to clean R1 and apply the cream. She did not assess R1's vaginal area herself. She did not recall anything about injuries or bleeding being reported to her during shift report.

The pattern that emerges across these accounts is consistent: a staff member is told something is wrong, accepts an explanation from the AP, and does not look further. A bruise on the leg: wheelchair. A vaginal complaint: a yeast infection, self-inflicted scratching. Blood and bruising on the morning of March 22: a matter to be dealt with after cares, after lunch, sometime in the afternoon.

CNA P had felt it. She'd said something. She was told the AP's presence was his right and that was the end of the conversation.

The inspection report does not name R1, does not describe her diagnosis or cognitive status, and does not say whether she was able to communicate what had happened to her. It does not say whether law enforcement was contacted or what investigation, if any, followed. It notes only that the AP was always present, even during intimate cares, and that on the afternoon of March 22, when the nurses finally assessed her together, he would not make eye contact.

By March 24, two days after the injuries were discovered, the facility told inspectors it had completed corrective actions. Staff had been retrained on recognizing signs of potential abuse and on the timelines for reporting to the administrator, law enforcement, and the state agency. The deficiency was classified as past noncompliance.

The inspection report does not say whether R1 remained at the facility after March 22. It does not say whether the AP was present in her room after that day. It does not describe what she experienced during the hours between 8:00 AM, when the blood was first seen, and 2:00 PM, when someone finally sat down to examine her, with the man who had been watching her cares standing somewhere in the room.

CNA P told inspectors she had felt unsettled. She had reported it. She had been told to let it be.

She let it be.

Full Inspection Report

The details above represent a summary of key findings. View the complete inspection report for Galena Nursing & Rehab Center from 2026-03-30 including all violations, facility responses, and corrective action plans.

Additional Resources

• View all inspection reports for Galena Nursing & Rehab Center
• Browse all KS nursing home inspections