F 0689
Level of Harm - Minimal harm
or potential for actual harm
Residents Affected - Few
Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to
prevent accidents.
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision to prevent unsafe
wandering and elopement of 1 cognitively impaired Resident for 1 (Resident #1) of 1 resident reviewed for
elopement. The facility also failed to implement care planned elopement intervention for 1 (Resident #2) of
5 residents reviewed for elopement.The findings included:Review of the facility policy titled Elopements and
Wandering Residents with a revision date of 3/16/23 indicated Elopement occurs when a resident leaves
the premises or a safe area without authorization (i.e., an order for discharge or leave of absence) and/or
any necessary supervision to do so. 4. Monitoring and Managing Residents at Risk for Elopement or
Unsafe Wandering. C. Interventions to increase staff awareness of the resident's risk, modify the resident's
behavior, or to minimize risks associated with hazards will be added to the residents care plan and
communicated to appropriate staff. Ie: diversional activities, wander guard placement. E. Charge nurses and
unit managers will monitor the implementation of interventions, response to interventions, and document
accordingly.Review of the clinical record for Resident #1 revealed diagnoses included Alzheimer's
disease.Review of the care plan for cognition initiated on 2/24/24 noted Resident #1 scored 4 on the Brief
Interview for Mental Status, indicating severe cognitive impairment.On 9/16/25 at 9:37 a.m., in an interview
Staff A Registered Nurse (RN) said on 9/5/25 around 9:37 p.m., she noticed Resident #1 was missing. She
had given him his medications and went to the room next door to give another resident eye drops. When
she exited into the hallway, she noticed the light was on in Resident #1's room. She went to check on him,
but he wasn't there. She said she asked Staff B Certified Nurse Assistant who said she had seen him
shortly before. They called an elopement alert and began searching inside and outside the building. They
received a call from the hospital notifying them they had found Resident #1 in their parking lot and had him
at the hospital. Resident #1 returned from the hospital a few hours later with no injuries. RN Staff A said
she did not know how Resident #1 got out of the building. Staff A said at the time Resident #1 had not been
identified as an elopement risk and wasn't wearing a wander alert bracelet. She said since the elopement a
wander alert bracelet had been applied to Resident #1. A wander alert bracelet triggers an alarm when
near an exit door. On 9/16/25 at 11:05 a.m., in an interview the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) said
she investigated Resident #1's elopement. She said prior to the incident, Resident #1 had not been
identified as an elopement risk. Since the incident, they had placed a wander alert bracelet on him to notify
staff if he approaches the exit doors. She said after the incident all the alarms in the building worked when
checked and it was her opinion that Resident #1 followed a family member out of the side door. She said
another resident's son usually left around that time, and Resident #1 probably followed him out. She
explained family members have a code to let themselves out the side door in the dining room. The ADON
said she had just found out after the incident that another resident's son had the code because of his late
hours. She said they will be looking into changing codes, but she was pretty sure it was tied to the
(continued on next page)
Any deficiency statement ending with an asterisk (*) denotes a deficiency which the institution may be excused from correcting providing it is determined that other
safeguards provide sufficient protection to the patients. (See instructions.) Except for nursing homes, the findings stated above are disclosable 90 days following the
date of survey whether or not a plan of correction is provided. For nursing homes, the above findings and plans of correction are disclosable 14 days following the date
these documents are made available to the facility. If deficiencies are cited, an approved plan of correction is requisite to continued program participation.
LABORATORY DIRECTOR'S OR PROVIDER/SUPPLIER
REPRESENTATIVE'S SIGNATURE
TITLE
(X6) DATE
FORM CMS-2567 (02/99)
Previous Versions Obsolete
Facility ID:
If continuation sheet
Page 1 of 2
Event ID:
106089
Printed: 05/28/2026
Form Approved OMB
No. 0938-0391
Department of Health & Human Services
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
STATEMENT OF DEFICIENCIES
AND PLAN OF CORRECTION
(X1) PROVIDER/SUPPLIER/CLIA
IDENTIFICATION NUMBER:
(X2) MULTIPLE CONSTRUCTION
106089
B. Wing
A. Building
(X3) DATE SURVEY
COMPLETED
09/16/2025
NAME OF PROVIDER OR SUPPLIER
STREET ADDRESS, CITY, STATE, ZIP CODE
Oasis at the Conch Republic Nursing and Rehab
5860 W Junior College Rd
Key West, FL 33040
For information on the nursing home's plan to correct this deficiency, please contact the nursing home or the state survey agency.
(X4) ID PREFIX TAG
SUMMARY STATEMENT OF DEFICIENCIES
(Each deficiency must be preceded by full regulatory or LSC identifying information)
F 0689
Level of Harm - Minimal harm
or potential for actual harm
Residents Affected - Few
FORM CMS-2567 (02/99)
Previous Versions Obsolete
Fire/EMS (Emergency Medical Services), so there would be a whole process involved. She said she was
not sure how he got the code, and he was the only one that she knew of that comes and goes that late.On
9/16/25 at 12:04 p.m., in an interview the Director of Nursing (DON) said no family member should have the
code to get in or out the door. She said it was not policy to have the code handed out and if that had been
the case, they needed to change it. The DON said if a family member is visiting after hours, they should ring
the doorbell to get in or get a staff member to let them out.On 9/16/25 the facility provided list of 5 residents
(including Resident #2) who were identified as elopement risk and wore a wander alert bracelet. On 9/16/25
at 11:16 a.m., observation of residents with wander alert bracelets with the ADON revealed Resident #2 did
not have a wander guard on. Resident #2 was unable to say where the wander alert bracelet was when
asked.On 9/16/25 review of the clinical record for Resident #2 revealed no documentation verifying the
wander alert bracelet was on and functioning. On 9/16/25 at 12:04 p.m., in an interview the DON said the
placement and functioning of the wander alert bracelets should be checked every day. She said there was
no official wander alert policy, or policy for checking it during shift change. On 9/16/25 at 12:04 p.m., in an
interview the ADON said wander alert bracelets placement and functioning should be documented on the
Treatment Administration Record (TAR) daily. She said she recently found out that the box to document the
wander alert bracelets had somehow dropped off the TARS and they hadn't been documented on. She said
she could not say how long the documentation of the wander alert bracelets had been missing from the
TARS.On 9/16/25 at 2:30 p.m., in an interview the Administrator said they were working on changing the
codes to the doors, and no family members should have the codes to the doors. The Assistant
Administrator was present during the interview and said all residents at risk for elopement should have their
wander alert bracelets on and should be monitored daily by staff.
Event ID:
Facility ID:
106089
If continuation sheet
Page 2 of 2