Skip to main content

Inspection visit

Inspection

Avir at PortlandCMS #6758501 citation on this visit
1 citation recorded

Inspector’s narrative

What the inspector wrote

This survey cited 1 deficiency. The full statement and the facility’s plan of correction follow, verbatim from the federal record.

F 0695 Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed. Level of Harm - Minimal harm or potential for actual harm **NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents who needed respiratory care were provided such care consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the resident's goals and preferences for 2 of 3 (Resident #1 and Resident #2) residents reviewed for respiratory care.The facility failed to obtain/verify physician's orders to administer oxygen at 3 LPM for Resident #1 from 06/02/25 to 06/23/25 and oxygen at 2 LPM for Resident #2 from 06/19/25 to 07/01/25.This deficient practice could place residents who receive respiratory care at an increased risk of developing respiratory complications and a decreased quality of care. The findings included: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 07/01/25 reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included: encounter for orthopedic aftercare, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (lung disease), chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia (low oxygen levels), dependence on supplemental oxygen, muscle wasting and atrophy, depression, and anxiety disorder. Resident #1 was discharged on 06/23/25. Record review of Resident #1's MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected Resident #1 had a BIMS score of 12, indicating moderate cognitive impairment. Resident #1 was noted to be on oxygen.Record review of Resident #1's care plan dated 07/01/25 reflected [Resident #1] was at risk for experiencing shortness of breath related to COPD and chronic respiratory failure. Interventions included: provide oxygen as ordered/recommended by my physician. Date initiated: 06/03/25. Record review of Resident #1's order summary dated 07/01/25 reflected O2 Filter - Check, Clean and/or replace filter every week, every night shift, every Sunday. Start date: 06/08/25. No other order noted for O2/oxygen. Record review of Resident #1's MAR dated June 2025 reflected no orders for the O2's flow rate of delivery. Only order noted for O2/oxygen was O2 Filter - Check, Clean and/or replace filter every week, every night shift, every Sunday which was completed. Record review of Resident #2's face sheet dated 07/01/25 reflected the resident was an [AGE] year-old male who was last admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included: cellulitis (bacterial infection of the skin and the tissue beneath the skin) of right lower limb, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (lung disease), heart failure, acute and chronic respiratory failure with hypercapnia (excessive carbon dioxide levels in the blood), chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia (low oxygen levels), and muscle wasting and atrophy. Record review of Resident #2's MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected Resident #2 had a BIMS score of 15, indicating cognitively intact. Resident #2 was noted to be on oxygen. Record review of Resident #2's care plan dated 07/01/25 reflected [Resident #2] was at risk for experiencing shortness of breath related to COPD and acute respiratory failure. Interventions included: provide oxygen as ordered/recommended by my physician. Date initiated: 06/20/25. Record review of Resident #2's order summary dated 07/01/25 reflected O2 sats every shift. Start date: 06/19/25. No other order noted for O2/oxygen. Record review of Resident #2's MAR dated June 2025 reflected no orders for the O2's flow rate of delivery. Only order noted for Residents Affected - Some (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 3 Event ID: 675850 Printed: 05/15/2026 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 675850 B. Wing A. Building (X3) DATE SURVEY COMPLETED 07/01/2025 NAME OF PROVIDER OR SUPPLIER STREET ADDRESS, CITY, STATE, ZIP CODE Avir at Portland 221 Cedar Dr Portland, TX 78374 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 0695 Level of Harm - Minimal harm or potential for actual harm Residents Affected - Some O2/oxygen was O2 sats every shift which was completed. On 07/01/25 at 12:45 PM, in an interview with Resident #1, he said during his stay at the facility, he received oxygen and never went without it. Resident #1 said he used continuous oxygen at 3 LPM due to his diagnosis of COPD. On 07/01/25 at 1:05 PM, in an interview with Resident #2, he said he used continuous oxygen at 2 LPM. Resident #2 said he had always used oxygen due to his diagnosis of COPD. Resident #2 said the nurses checked on the oxygen machine and changed his tubing. Resident #2 was not aware of any changes to his physician's orders regarding his oxygen needs. Resident #2 said he had no trouble breathing or felt sick during this stay. On 07/01/25 at 1:15 PM, an observation with Resident #2 revealed the oxygen tubing was connected and the oxygen setting was set at 2 LPM. Resident #2 sat in his wheelchair and was not in distress. Oxygen in use sign noted at door. On 07/01/25 at 1:35, in an interview with LVN C, she said she knew if a resident needed O2 because prior to admission the facility received their paperwork which indicated the use of oxygen. LVN C said another way she found out a resident would need O2 was if the office staff placed a concentrator in the room in preparation for the admission or if the resident mentioned it during the admission assessments. LVN C said she did not recall completing the admission for Resident #1. LVN C said she recalled Resident #1 used O2 but did not recall the LPM setting. LVN C said Resident #2 used O2 at 2 LPM and it was continuous. LVN C said Resident #1 and Resident #2 had to have physician's orders for the oxygen administration and the nurses ensured to follow the orders on the MAR. On 07/01/25 at 2:25 PM, in an interview with the ADON, she said the nurses handled the oxygen concentrators and tubing. The ADON said any changes or issues regarding the oxygen machines, the staff knew to report to the nurses. The ADON said the residents had to have orders for the O2 concentration level and O2 use. The ADON said the MAR showed them the order for the LPM rate, to check the tubing, change filter, and check O2 sats. On 07/01/25 at 3:45 PM, in an interview with the DON, he said when residents were admitted , the orders came in their admissions packets, the nurses input the orders in the system, called the doctor to verify orders, and the doctor agreed or changed the medications as they saw needed. The DON said if a medication such as O2 was not part of the admitting orders or once the nurse assessed and noted the resident needed oxygen, then the nurse should have called the doctor to obtain orders. The DON said if a resident used oxygen, then there was physician's orders in place. The DON said Resident #1 had an order to change O2 tubing and check/clean/replace O2 filter every week. The DON said Resident #1 should have had an order for the oxygen and he did not. The DON said as an example, the order should have read O2 at 3LPM via nasal cannula, continuous or as needed. The DON said Resident #2 had the order to check for O2 sats every shift and did not have an order for the oxygen. The DON said he reviewed the MAR for Resident #1 and Resident #2 which had no orders for the O2's LPM. The DON said the LPM was the flow rate of delivery which was different for each resident. The DON said the nurses were in-serviced on the admissions process and changes of condition. The DON said any nurse that noted a resident using oxygen without a physician's order should have called the doctor to obtain clarification or orders. The DON said Resident #1 and Resident #2 had no negative outcomes as a result of lack of orders for the oxygen administration but it was important to have orders in place so that all staff were aware and knew what flow rate of delivery the residents required. The DON said there was potential for harm to the residents depending on if they were contraindicated or maybe allergic, but Resident #1 and Resident #2 were not. The DON said the lack of orders could have resulted in hypoxia or hyperoxia but there were no indications that Resident #1 or Resident #2 were hypoxic (insufficient oxygen) or hyperoxic (excessive oxygen) during their stays. Record review of the facility's policy subject titled, Oxygen Administration, dated revised January 2023, revealed, Compliance Guidelines: A resident receives oxygen (continued on next page) FORM CMS-2567 (02/99) Previous Versions Obsolete Event ID: Facility ID: 675850 If continuation sheet Page 2 of 3 Printed: 05/15/2026 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 675850 B. Wing A. Building (X3) DATE SURVEY COMPLETED 07/01/2025 NAME OF PROVIDER OR SUPPLIER STREET ADDRESS, CITY, STATE, ZIP CODE Avir at Portland 221 Cedar Dr Portland, TX 78374 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 0695 Level of Harm - Minimal harm or potential for actual harm therapy when there is an order by a physician. Procedure: 3. Obtain physician orders for oxygen administration. Orders should include the following:a. oxygen source to be used (concentrator, tank)b. method of delivery (cannula, mask)c. flow rate of delivery Residents Affected - Some FORM CMS-2567 (02/99) Previous Versions Obsolete Event ID: Facility ID: 675850 If continuation sheet Page 3 of 3

Reading this as a family member? Your long-term care ombudsman is a free advocate for residents and families.

Back to top

Citations

1 citation recorded*CMS

What do CMS severity letters mean?

Serious (G-L). Actual harm to a resident, or immediate jeopardy. Codes G through I indicate actual harm; J through L indicate immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety.

General (A-F). No actual harm found, or harm that is minimal. The facility must still submit a Plan of Correction. Most CMS citations land here.

Each letter combines severity with scope: how many residents the deficiency affected.

  • 0695GeneralS&S Epotential for harm

    F695 - Respiratory care, including tracheostomy care and tracheal suctioning

    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.

FAQ · About this visit

Common questions about this visit

What happened during the July 1, 2025 survey of Avir at Portland?

This was a inspection survey of Avir at Portland on July 1, 2025. The surveyor cited 1 deficiency, recorded on the federal Form 2567 statement of deficiencies.

Were any deficiencies cited at Avir at Portland on July 1, 2025?

Yes, 1 deficiency was cited, each with a CMS Scope and Severity grade. The first was: "Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed."

What type of survey was this?

This was a inspection survey conducted by state surveyors under federal Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) oversight. Findings are published on CMS Care Compare.

SourceView on CMS Care Compare

Share this reportEmail

Next steps

Concerned about a resident’s care?Find your local ombudsman through the Eldercare Locatoror file a complaint with your state survey agency.

Researching this visit professionally?Book a 15-minute calland we will walk through what we have on file.

Data from CMS Care Compare public records. Dataset last refreshed . If you believe any information is inaccurate, report it here.