Four Western Pennsylvania nursing homes cited for violations |

Four Western Pennsylvania nursing homes cited for violations

Renatta Signorini
An amended Americans With Disabilities Act would remove incentives for businesses to comply with the law, critics say.

The state Department of Health cited four Western Pennsylvania nursing homes for immediate jeopardy violations in the past year, according to PennLive.

The department defines immediate jeopardy as a situation in which a resident’s health and safety are at risk.

The four facilities are among 36 that received immediate jeopardy citations between July 1, 2016, and June 30, 2017, the news outlet reported.

The local facilities that the health department cited are:

• Transitions Healthcare in North Huntingdon for not taking precautions to prevent a resident from burning his fingers while smoking. The health department levied a fine of $4,500.

• Forbes Center for Rehab and Healthcare in Pittsburgh after failing to monitor the condition of a resident who died from head injuries after a fall. The health department levied a $9,000 fine and moved the facility’s license to provisional status.

• The Grove at Latrobe for failing to supervise residents who smoked and a mentally impaired person who suffered repeated falls. The health department levied an $11,750 fine.

• The Grove at Irwin in North Huntingdon after two nurse aides took photos of a naked resident on their cellphones. The health department levied a $3,750 fine and moved the facility’s license to provisional status.

Renatta Signorini is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach her at 724-837-5374, [email protected] or via Twitter @byrenatta.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.