Kindred Transitional Care and Rehab – Highlander

MI Elder Abuse Free Legal ConsultationDid someone you love suffer elder abuse or neglect at Kindred Transitional Care and Rehab  Highlander? Our lawyers can help.

Abuse of the elderly is not acceptable and we fight hard in these types of cases. If you suspect a nursing home or caregiver has caused harm to your loved one in someone elses’ care, contact our law firm today for a free legal consultation.

Talking to us does not obligate you to anything, but we may be able to tell you if you have a claim and the value of your case. If we accept your case, you pay no fee unless we recover for you.

About Kindred Transitional Care and Rehab – Highlander

Kindred Transitional Care and Rehab Highlander is a for profit, 176-bed Medicare/Medicaid certified skilled nursing facility that provides services to the residents of New Bedford, Fall River, Dartmouth, Westport and the other towns in and surrounding Bristol County, Massachusetts.

Kindred Transitional Care and Rehab Highlander focuses on 24 hour care, respite care, hospice care and rehabilitation services.

Kindred Transitional Care and Rehab – Highlander
1748 Highland Ave,
Fall River, MA 02720

Phone: (508) 730-1070
Website: http://www.highlandernursing.com/

CMS Star Quality Rating

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) rates all nursing homes that accept medicare or medicaid benefits. CMS created a 5 Star Quality Rating System—1 star is the lowest rating and 5 stars is the highest—that look at three areas.

As of 2017, Kindred Transitional Care and Rehab Highlander in Fall River, Massachusetts received a rating of 2 out of 5 stars.

Performance Area Rating
Overall Rating 3 out of 5 (Average)
State Health Inspections 4 out of 5 (Above Average)
Staffing 1 out of 5 (Much Below Average)
Quality Measures 1 out of 5 (Much Below Average)

Fines and Penalties

Our Nursing Home Accident Lawyers inspected government records and discovered Kindred Transitional Care and Rehab – Highlander committed the following offenses:

Failed to Hire only people with no legal history of abusing, neglecting or mistreating residents; or report and investigate any acts or reports of abuse, neglect or mistreatment of residents.

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY**

Based on interview and record review, for two of three sampled residents (Resident #1 and Resident #2), the Facility failed to ensure that Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) #1 immediately reported two allegations of abuse to the Administrator or their designee. On 8/13/16 and 8/14/16, during the 7:00 A.M. through 3:00 P.M. shift, CNA #1 observed CNA #2 squeeze Resident #1’s arm and bend his/her fingers, and was rough while providing care to Resident #1 and Resident #2, who were both cognitively impaired. CNA #1 did not report what she observed until 8/16/16, three days after the alleged incidents.

Findings include:

The Facility’s Policy and Procedure on Abuse Prevention, dated 7/28/14, indicated all alleged violations involving mistreatment, neglect or abuse, including injuries of unknown source and misappropriation of resident property are reported immediately to the Administrator or designee. Resident #1’s most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment Form, completed 7/6/16, indicated Resident #1 had a [DIAGNOSES REDACTED].

The Surveyor was unable to interview Resident #1 due to Resident #1’s impaired cognition. Resident #2’s most recent MDS Assessment Form, completed 8/3/16, indicated Resident #2 had a [DIAGNOSES REDACTED].

The Surveyor was unable to interview Resident #2 due to Resident #2’s impaired cognition. Review of the Facility Internal Investigation, dated 8/16/16, indicated at approximately 2:30 P.M., on 8/16/16, CNA #1 reported to Nurse #1 that she observed CNA #2 squeeze Resident #1’s arm hard and bend his/her fingers and was rough as she provided care to Resident #1 and Resident #2. The Facility Internal Investigation indicated CNA #1 believed the incidents occurred on 8/13/16 and 8/14/16 during the 7:00 A.M. through 3:00 P.M. shift. The Facility Internal Investigation indicated CNA #1 did not report the alleged incidents at that time, and waited until her next scheduled day of work at the Facility on 8/16/16 to report the alleged incidents.

The Surveyor attempted to interview CNA #1, however CNA #1 did not respond to phone calls or letter, and was unable to be interviewed.

The Surveyor attempted to interview CNA #2, however CNA #2 did not respond to phone calls or letter, and was unable to be interviewed.

Review of CNA #2’s time card, dated 8/13/16 through 8/20/16, indicated CNA #2 worked at the Facility and interacted with residents on 8/13/16, 8/14/16, and 8/16/16.

The Surveyor interviewed the Administrator at 8:50 A.M., and throughout the day on 12/5/16. The Administrator said it was the Facility policy for staff to immediately report all allegations of abuse and accused staff were to be immediately suspended pending the internal investigation. The Administrator said that once the allegations became known to management on 8/16/16, CNA #2 was suspended effective 8/16/16 pending the internal investigation. The Administrator said CNA #1 was also suspended due to delay in reporting the allegations of alleged abuse.

On 12/5/16, the Facility provided the Surveyor with a plan of correction which addressed the concern as evidenced by:

A) The Administrator said CNA #2 was immediately suspended pending outcome of the Facility investigation and as of the date of survey, CNA #2 was no longer employed at the Facility.

B) CNA #1 was suspended and received verbal counseling for failure to follow Facility policies. CNA #2 was re-educated on the Facility’s Abuse Policy and Procedure, including timely reporting, and was monitored by the Administrator and/or Director of Nurses weekly for four weeks to validate there were no further care concerns or events to report in accordance with the Facility’s policy and procedure.

C) An audit of CNA #2’s assignment was conducted on 8/16/16 to assure there were no other resident care concerns.

D) A Facility wide mandatory in-service program was initiated on 8/16/16 and completed on 8/22/16 regarding the Facility’s Abuse Policy and Procedure, including timely reporting.

E) The Administrator and Director of Nurses conducted weekly checks with all staff members for 6 weeks to determine that there were no other resident care concerns or events to report in accordance with the Facility’s policy and procedure.

F) The Administrator was responsible to monitor the on-going audits and present the findings to the Quality Assurance Improvement Committee.

G) The Quality Assurance Improvement Committee will continue to review findings with additional measures to be implemented as needed.

The Facility was placed in past noncompliance as of 10/1/16.

Failed to make sure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY**

Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to provide professional standards of care for subcutaneous injections (A) to rotate injections sites for 5 (#1, #4, #12, #19, #20) of 7 sampled Residents receiving insulin; and (B) to rotate injections sites for 4 (#2, #3, #4, #12) of 9 sampled Residents receiving injectable anticoagulant medication, from a total sample of 24 Residents.

Findings include:

Review of the facility policy for Subcutaneous Injection on 7/5/17 indicated that the nurse must document the identified site that the injection was administered to. Review of the Standard of Practice identified from the National Institute of Health (NIH) indicated it is extremely important to rotate sites to keep the skin healthy. Repeated injections in the same spot can cause scarring and hardening of fatty tissue that will interfere with the uptake of medication. Each injection should be 1 inch apart.

A) 1. For Resident #20, the facility failed to rotate injection sites for insulin administration.

Resident #20 was admitted to the facility in 8/2013 with [DIAGNOSES REDACTED]. Review of the physician’s orders indicated that the Resident had insulin orders to administer a scheduled dose of [MEDICATION NAME] Solution (insulin) 50 units every 12 hours as well as an order for [REDACTED].>If CBG if 150-199 mg/dl administer 3 units;

If CBG is 200-249 mg/dl administer 6 units;
If CBG is 250-299 mg/dl administer 9 units;
If CBG is 300-350 mg/dl administer 12 units;
If above 350 administer 12 units,

Review of the 6/2017 and 7/1/17 to 7/5/17 Medication Administration Records indicated that the Resident did receive the appropriate amount of insulin, however review of the 6/2017 and 7/2017 Location of Administration Reports indicated that the staff failed to rotate the injection site and frequently identified the LLQ (left lower quadrant) as the point of injection.

Review of the 6/2017 Location of Administration Report indicated that Resident #20 received an injection of [MEDICATION NAME]in the Left Lower Quadrant (LLQ) 51 of 60 injections, and received [MEDICATION NAME]in the LLQ 126 of 174 injections. Review of the 7/2017 (7/1-7/5/17) Location of Administration Report indicated that Resident #20 received an injection of [MEDICATION NAME] Insulin in the LLQ 7 of 9 injections, and received [MEDICATION NAME]in the LLQ 16 of 28 injections.

The Director of Nurses was interviewed on 7/5/17 at 4:40 P.M. and reviewed with the surveyor the injection site report for Resident #20. The DON said that it is the Standard of Practice to rotate injection sites to reduce the risk of tissue necrosis. He said that he felt the nurses were rotating the injection sites but were not choosing the drop down option to identify the specific site. He said that they should be rotating and documenting accurately.

On 7/6/17 at 10:15 A.M., the DON provided the surveyor with a demonstration on the Simulated Medication pass program and identified that the first choice of injection sites was the Left Lower Quadrant (LLQ) and he said that nursing staff may not be taking the time to scroll thru all the options and clicking on the correct site. He also said that the nursing staff can view, in the same window, the last two injections that the Resident received and the location of the injection site.

2. For Resident #3, the facility failed to rotate injection sites for the administration of an injectable anticoagulant medication [MEDICATION NAME]. Resident #3 was admitted to the facility in 6/2017 with [DIAGNOSES REDACTED]. The Resident had a physician’s order for [MEDICATION NAME] Solution 40 mg/0.4 ml to inject 1 application subcutaneous one time a day for [MEDICAL CONDITIONS] precaution. Review of the Location of Administration Report on 7/5/17 indicated that from 6/8-7/5/17 the Resident received [MEDICATION NAME] injections in the Left Lower Quadrant (LLQ) 23 of 27 injections.

Unit Manager #2 was interviewed on 7/6/17 at 10:35 A.M. and confirmed the frequency of the injection site in the Resident’s LLQ and said that DON had made the staff aware of the problem the prior evening.

3. For Resident #1, the facility failed to rotate the injection site for insulin medications [MEDICATION NAME] and [MEDICATION NAME] in accordance with their policy and professional standards of nursing practice.

Resident #1 was admitted to the facility in 5/2014 with [DIAGNOSES REDACTED]. Review of the physician orders indicated that Resident #1 had orders for the following doses of insulin:

-[MEDICATION NAME] Solution (insulin) inject 24 units subcutaneously (under the skin) once in the morning
-[MEDICATION NAME] Solution inject 12 units subcutaneously in the afternoon
-[MEDICATION NAME] Solution inject 12 units subcutaneously in the evening
-[MEDICATION NAME] inject 26 units subcutaneously at bedtime The 6/2017 and 7/2017 (7/1-7/5/17) Location of Administration Reports were reviewed. Of 218 injections of insulin, 174 were documented as administered in the left lower quadrant (LLQ) of the Resident’s abdomen.

The Director of Nurses was interviewed on 7/5/17 at 4:40 P.M. and reviewed with the surveyor the injection sites report for Resident #20. The DON said that it is the Standard of Practice to rotate injection sites to reduce the risk of tissue necrosis. He said that he felt the nurses were rotating the injection sites but were not choosing the drop down option to identify the site. He said that they should be rotating and documenting accurately.

4. For Resident #12, the facility failed to rotate the injection sites for insulin and for the anticoagulant medication [MEDICATION NAME], in accordance with their policy and professional standards of nursing practice.

Resident #12 was admitted to the facility in 6/2017 with [DIAGNOSES REDACTED]. A). Review of the physician’s orders indicated that the Resident had an order to administer a scheduled dose of [MEDICATION NAME] Solution (insulin) 8 units at mealtimes as well as an order for [REDACTED].>-If CBG is 0-149 mg/dl administer 0 units

-If CBG is 150-199 mg/dl administer 2 units
-If CBG is 200-249 mg/dl administer 4 units
-If CBG is 250-299 mg/dl administer 6 units
-If CBG is 300-349 mg/dl administer 8 units
-If CBG is 350-399 mg/dl administer 10 units
-If CBG is 400-449 mg/dl administer 12 units

-If CBG is 450 or mg/dl or greater, administer 14 units and notify the physician. The 6/2017 and 7/1-7/5/17, Location of Administration Reports were reviewed. Of 39 injections of insulin, 30 were documented as administered in the LLQ of the abdomen.

B). Review of the physician’s orders indicated that the Resident had an order to administer [MEDICATION NAME] Sodium Solution 5,000 unit/ml twice a day to prevent [MEDICAL CONDITION] ([MEDICAL CONDITION] is a blood clot that can occur as a complication following a bone fracture).

The 6/2017 and 7/1-7/5/17, Location of Administration Reports were reviewed. Of 28 injections of [MEDICATION NAME], 19 were documented as administered in the left lower quadrant.

5. For Resident #4, the facility failed to rotate injection sites for insulin and anticoagulant medication. A.) Resident #4 was admitted to the facility in 4/2017 with [DIAGNOSES REDACTED]. Review of current physician’s orders included to administer [MEDICATION NAME] Solution injection subcutaneously before meals and at bedtime per sliding scale as follows:

If CBG if 150-199 mg/dl administer 1 units;
If CBG is 200-249 mg/dl administer 2 units;
If CBG is 250-299 mg/dl administer 3 units;
If CBG is 300-349 mg/dl administer 4 units;
If CBG is 350-399 mg/dl administer 6 units;
If CBG is 400-449 mg/dl administer 8 units;
If above 450 notify MD.

Review of the 6/2017 and 7/1/17 to 7/5/17 Medication Administration Records including the Location of Administration Reports indicated that the staff failed to ensure sites of the insulin injections were rotated frequently as the documentation indicated the LLQ (left lower quadrant) was the injection site repeatedly used. Review of the 6/2017 Location of Administration Report indicated that Resident #4 received an injection of [MEDICATION NAME] Solution insulin in the Left Lower Quadrant (LLQ) 49 of 68 injections, frequently 8 consecutive injections without use of an alternative body site.

Review of the 7/2017 (7/1/17 to 7/6/17) Location of Administration Report indicated that Resident #4 received an injection of [MEDICATION NAME] Insulin in the LLQ for 9 of 9 subcutaneous injections administered.

B.) Resident #4’s physician orders included [MEDICATION NAME] Solution (40 milligram/0.4 milliliter) injection once daily for prevention of [MEDICAL CONDITIONS].

Review of the 6/2017 and 7/1/17 to 7/6/17 Medication Administration Records including the Location of Administration Reports indicated that the staff failed to ensure sites of the anticoagulant injections were rotated frequently as the documentation indicated the LLQ (left lower quadrant) was the injection site repeatedly used.

Review of the 6/2017 Location of Administration Report indicated that Resident #4 received an injection of [MEDICATION NAME] 16 of 30 days in the Left Lower Quadrant (LLQ). Review of the 7/2017 (7/1/17 to 7/5/17) Location of Administration Report indicated that Resident #4 received a subcutaneous injection of [MEDICATION NAME] in the LLQ for 3 of 5 opportunities.

6. For Resident #19, the facility failed to rotate injection sites for insulin administration.

Resident #19 was admitted to the facility in 8/2014 with [DIAGNOSES REDACTED]. Review of current physician’s orders for insulin and diabetes management include [MEDICATION NAME] Solution (100 unit/ml) inject 20 units subcutaneously once a day; and administer Humalog ([MEDICATION NAME]) Solution (100 unit/ml) insulin, three times (6:00 A.M., 11:00 A.M. and 4:00 P.M.) a day according to Capillary Blood Glucose (CBG) levels per sliding scale as follows:

If CBG 0 – 69 follow hypoglycemic protocol;
If CBG 70 – 150 administer 0 units;
If CBG if 151 – 200 administer 1 units;
If CBG is 201 – 250 administer 2 units;
If CBG is 251 – 300 administer 3 units;
If CBG is 301- 350 administer 4 units;
If CBG is 351 – 400 administer 5 units;
If CBG is 401-or greater call MD.

Review of the 6/2017 Medication Administration Records including the Location of Administration Reports indicated that the staff failed to ensure sites of the insulin injections were rotated frequently as the documentation indicated the LLQ (left lower quadrant) was the injection site repeatedly used.

Review of the 6/2017 Location of Administration Report indicated that Resident #19 received an injection of [MEDICATION NAME] Solution insulin in the Left Lower Quadrant (LLQ) on 21 of 30 daily injections. For the Humalog sliding scale insulin injections, for 76 opportunities for sliding scale coverage requiring an injection of insulin, the injection was administered to the Resident’s LLQ 57 times.

7. For Resident #2, the facility failed to rotate injection sites for anticoagulation medication.

Resident #2 was admitted to the facility in 4/2012 with [DIAGNOSES REDACTED]. Record review indicates physician orders include [MEDICATION NAME] Sodium Solution (5000 units) injections subcutaneously twice a day for prevention of [MEDICAL CONDITIONS] (blood clot).

Review of the 6/2017 and 7/1/17 to 7/5/17 Medication Administration Records including the Location of Administration Reports indicated that the staff failed to ensure sites of the anticoagulant injections were rotated frequently as the documentation indicated the LLQ (left lower quadrant) was the injection site repeatedly used.

Review of the 6/2017 Location of Administration Report indicated that Resident #2 received injections of [MEDICATION NAME] 49 of 60 opportunities of injections were administered to the Resident’s Left Lower Quadrant (LLQ).

Review of the 7/2017 (7/1/17 to 7/5/17) Location of Administration Report indicated that Resident #2 received a subcutaneous injection of [MEDICATION NAME] in the LLQ for 7 of 9 opportunities.

The Director of Nurses was interviewed and made aware. The DON said that he felt the nurses were rotating the injection sites but were not choosing the drop down option to identify the specific site. He said that they should be rotating and documenting accurately.

Failed to assist those residents who need total help with eating/drinking, grooming and personal and oral hygiene.

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY**

Based on record review, observation, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure that services for personal grooming was provided for 1 Resident (#19) from a total sample of 24.

Findings include:

For Resident #19, who is unable to carry out activities of daily living, the facility failed to maintain Resident #19’s grooming services such as shaving to promote well being and quality of life.

Resident #19 was admitted to the facility in 8/2014 with [DIAGNOSES REDACTED].

Review of the Quarterly MDS (minimum data set), dated 4/26/17, indicated Resident #19 had severe cognitive impairment and required total care assistance for all activities (hygiene, groom, dressing and mobility) of daily living.

The resident was observed during the survey visit including the following:

During the initial facility tour 8:45 A.M. on 6/28/17, Resident #19 was observed seated in a geri-recliner chair in the day/dining room. Although dressed for the day in a green shirt and pants, the Resident’s appearance showed a need for grooming as hair was unkept with visible facial hair.

On 6/29/17 at 12:30 P.M., Resident #19 was being fed with noticeable facial hair from the previous day.

On 6/30/17 at 10:35 A.M., Resident #19 was observed in the day room in a geri recliner dressed for the day, unshaven with several days of beard growth.

On 7/5/17 at the breakfast meal service, Resident #19 was seated in a recliner chair being fed by staff. Observation of the Resident’s facial beard growth revealed that no grooming services had been provided that included a shave from the previous days observed. The Resident’s nails were in need of cleaning as evidence by darkened debris under the resident’s fingernails.

Review of the unit shower schedule indicated Resident #19 was scheduled for a shower on 7/3/17, although the bathing coding for nurse aides indicated a bed bath was provided on 7/3/17. The nurse aide care book indicated Resident #19 was totally dependent for grooming, bathing, incontinent care / hygiene needs, dressing, transfers and feeding. During interview with the assigned certified nurse aide (cna #1) on 7/5/17 at 4:15 P.M., the cna #1 said that sometimes Resident #19 can push hands near his/her face and could be difficult to shave safely with a razor. Further interview, cna #1 was asked what care approaches are used for Resident #19, with hearing and vision impairments, especially during care for bathing and shaving. Although the cna #1 could not articulate care approaches for this Resident, the cna stated that the resident requires two persons as the Resident can stiffen up during transfers/or when providing care and that he would report to nursing if there was any problems of difficulty or refusals in providing care to a resident.

At 5:30 P.M. on 7/5/17, Resident #19’s face continued to have a significant amount of facial hair and required grooming. Unit Manager #3 was asked by the Surveyor if there had been any concerns regarding difficulty with shower or shaving Resident #19 and Unit Manager #3 said that no one has communicated that Resident #19 had past refusals or difficulty in shaving / showers. Review of nursing progress notes for 6/2017 and 7/2017 did include any reports of resident refusals to allow care.

On 7/6/17 at 9:12 A.M., Resident #19 was observed with no facial hair as the Resident’s face was shaven, with hair clean and combed. Unit Manager #3 said that there had been no difficulty reported when staff provided care and discussed the need for further education of nurse aides with care approaches.

Failed to properly care for residents needing special services, including: injections, colostomy, ureostomy, ileostomy, tracheostomy care, tracheal suctioning, respiratory care, foot care, and prostheses

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to follow physician orders [REDACTED].#4), in a total sample of 24 Residents.

Findings include:

1. For Resident #4, the facility failed to measure the Resident’s external catheter length with each dressing change, weekly and as needed (prn) according to physician orders [REDACTED].

During the course of record review and interview with Unit Nurse Manager #1, the electronic nursing documentation failed to alert the nursing staff providing and documenting care and services to the PICC line, to enter a measurement of the external catheter length on the treatment record.

Resident #4 was admitted to the facility in 4/2017 with [DIAGNOSES REDACTED]. Clinical record review indicated Resident #4 has required a PICC line to provide intravenous access for antibiotic and long term total [MEDICATION NAME] nutrition administration.

Review of 4/5/17 admission physician orders [REDACTED]. The external catheter length was to be measured weekly and at each dressing change. Review of 4/5/17 nursing documentation, the placement and external catheter measurement of 1 centimeter (cm) was noted on the treatment administration record.

The Resident’s condition changed and was hospitalized from [DATE] to 4/18/17. The hospital discharge report indicated Resident #4 was diagnosed with [REDACTED]. Upon return on 4/18/17, care and treatment orders for the PICC line resumed. On 4/18/17, documentation of a 4/10/17 X-ray was obtained to confirm the placement of the Central Venous Catheter with the total length noted as 39 centimeters on 4/14/17. However, record review indicated that nursing staff failed to document the measurement of the external catheter length on 4/18/17 and at the time of subsequent weekly dressing changes on 4/25/17.

Further clinical record review indicated that facility staff failed to measure the Resident’s external catheter length with each dressing change, weekly and as needed (prn) according to physician orders [REDACTED]. Although the 5/2017 medication and treatment administration records were signed by nursing staff that the measurement was done, there was no documented measurement of the external catheter length recorded for weekly and dressing changes as needed on 5/2/17, 5/9/17, 5/16/17, 5/23/17 5/28/17 and 5/30/17. Nursing progress notes did not contain documentation of the external catheter length which was verified through interview with the Unit Manager #1.

For 6/2017 documentation, the care and services for Resident #4’s PICC line continued to include to measure the external catheter length with each dressing change. Review of the 6/2017 medication and treatment administration records failed to document a measurement of the external catheter for the weekly dressing changes on 6/4/17, 6/11/17, 6/18/17 and 6/25/17. Additionally, times the dressing was checked and or changed on 6/6/17, 6/13/16, 6/20/17 and 6/27/17 there was no documented measurement. Review of nursing progress notes did not contain documentation of the external catheter length at the time of the weekly dressing changes.

During review on 6/29/17 at 12:50 P.M. with Unit Manager #1, the only notation of a measurement of the external catheter was recorded on 6/26/17 in a nurses progress note by Unit Manager #1 which listed the external catheter length measurement at 0 centimeters. However there was no prior measurements.

During interview on 6/30/17 at 5:15 P.M. the Director of Nurses was made aware that the measurements were not documented.

Kindred Transitional Care and Rehab – Highlander, Nursing Home Neglect and Elder Abuse Lawyers

If someone you love has suffered neglect or elder abuse by a senior caregiver, nursing home, or other care facility, our lawyers may be able to help. Regardless of whether or not criminal charges are filed against an alleged abuser, you may still be able to pursue compensation in a civil claim. Compensation in elder abuse cases may be awarded if someone in the care of another suffers harm due to intentional or negligent actions (including failure to take action).

Abuse of the elderly is not acceptable and we fight hard in these types of cases. If you suspect a nursing home or caregiver has caused harm to your loved one in someone elses’ care, contact our law firm today for a free legal consultation. Talking to us does not obligate you to anything, but we may be able to tell you if you have a claim and the value of your case. If we accept your case, you pay no fee unless we recover for you.

Oftentimes, victims of abuse either cannot or will not speak up for themselves out of fear. If you notice any warning signs or symptoms of neglect of abuse an an elderly person, it is important you contact an elder abuse lawyer immediately. Not only are there statute of limitations on filing a claim, but the sooner we start helping you, the easier it will be to collect evidence and talk to any witnesses before important details are lost, hidden, or forgotten.

Boston Personal Injury Lawyers for Elder Abuse Cases

We offer a free, no-obligation legal consultation to help you understand your rights and the value of your case. Our personal injury law firm takes cases involving elder abuse and neglect. We offer legal service to clients in Massachusetts, Rhode Island and New Hampshire.

Sources:

Medicare Nursing Home Profiles and Reports Kindred Transitional Care and Rehab – Highlander

Nursing Home Inspection, Safety and Deficiency Report- Kindred Transitional Care and Rehab – Highlander – 12/05/2016

Nursing Home Inspection, Safety and Deficiency Report- Kindred Transitional Care and Rehab – Highlander – 07/06/2017

Page Last Updated: December 12, 2017

Call Now Button