When I hear the word "elope", I usually think that star-crossed lovers have run off against their parents' wishes. Butin nursing home jargon, elopement is a situation in which a resident leaves a care facility without staff knowledge or supervision, potentially placing himself in danger. It's been a problem at Gracedale. Since Michelle Morton became administrator in March 2025, the home has been cited by the state Department of Health four times for elopement. (9/19/25, 9/23/25, 10/2/25 and 5/14/26). Despite NorCo Executive Tara Zrinski's assurances to county council that all kinds of preventive measures have been put in place to prevent cognitively impaired residents from wondering off, it may have happened again over the weekend.
I was first alerted to this based on an anonymous comment posted to this blog.* claiming there had been an elopement over the weekend. I nosed around, and this I am told that a confused resident attended a life enrichment activity with an activity aide. She apparently left and the activity aide assumed she got on an elevator with another activity aide. She instead went outside but returned with the family of another resident after telling them she was lost. She wasn't gone long, but she was gone. She apparently was still on the Gracedale campus.
Zrinski denied that any elopements occurred over the weekend, adding no one was off campus. "There was a resident who left an activity with life enrichment and went outside to the smoking area and then around to the front of the building for a few minutes. It counts as a near miss and is not reportable." She denied that the resident was brought back by the family of another resident, calling it a rumor. "She went out the side door and walked back to the front door, back inside.
According to state regulations, a nursing home must report the unexplained absence of any resident from a secured dementia care unit. Given that Gracedale is trying to upgrade its license, I could see why there'd be some reluctance to report this matter. But better safe than sorry. If it is a "near miss," as Zrinski said, let the state DOH make that determination. On the other hand, if there's a complaint and the DOH determines that it should have been notified, Gracedale is going to have a bigger problem.
____
* Many of you complain about the anonymous comments, which can be pretty mean. But I've actually seen much more hateful comments on other social media platforms in which the poster is identified. I allow anonymous comments because it sometimes clues me in to a story about which I would otherwise know nothing.
25 comments:
Agree Bernie, the determination belongs to the DOH, and the notification now is owned by Zirinsky
You are wise to include anonymous comments. The reason visitors come to a blog or message board is for the COMMENTS, the exchange between readers.
Sometime, these freely given comments are purely name calling without any real educational value to any other reader. This is the kind of ‘juvenile graffiti’ that should be quickly deleted by you. You can improve a little on this count, Bernie. But, for the most part, comments here do bring value to this site even if unsigned.
There are many excellent and logical points brought up by nameless contributors. Some have very legitimate reasons for remaining anonymous. Besides, isn’t it the opinion/message conveyed that really counts and can help add to everyone’s increased knowledge?
Another local blogger can’t tolerate any opinions that differ from his own. He obviously is not comfortable having to defend some of his own pronouncements (but actually just parroted statements he heard elsewhere). When challenged, that blogger, runs away by shutting everything down and calling contributors some derogatory name not based on any direct evidence. Why? Because he has no defense to the crap HE actually introduced in the first place!
Can we read about something other than Gracedale?
Also why the Venetians allowed anonymous comments. It's good policy
Here we go again with the smoke and mirrors. TZ is not a near miss, she's a total disaster
If Northampton had good political Gracedale would be up for sale.
So much risk is involved with allowing residents to smoke. That Gracedale allows smoking by residents may be a census builder, but if you factor in the costs of aids who must go outside with many of the residents to ensure their safety from smoking itself (a few are required to wear ash bibs) and to prevent them from wandering off, this policy should be reconsidered. Smoking is not a right but it is often treated as such at Gracedale.
This entire administration is a "near miss."
Government can not run t6his home.
Thanks for allowing me to post anonymously. My employment would not be happy with some of my posts. People are crazy they’d try to get me fired.
It is up to each blogger to set his own comment policy. I don't really give a shit what you think, especially about another blogger or your own opinions about anyone's comment policy. Most of you who comment anonymously have no legitimate reason for doing so, only ones you create to justify your cowardice. And by the way, comments mean more when the person owns them.
I suggest you try going without all anonymous comments and see what’s left.
If Tara’s recent remark
Is indicative of the thinking of the Gracedale administration, it’s best to close/sell the facility now. Even if the resident was deemed by the care team as competent to move about the campus independently and without supervision, this is still an incident since apparently this resident became unable to return to the activity and/or his/her unit without assistance. This itself would trigger a review by the care team since it would be a “change from the norm” for this resident. If the resident needed to be under the supervision of staff, was not and wandered away, had to be returned to the activity by the family of another resident possibly without the activities staff even realizing he/she had done so, it’s still an incident (only a more serious one). Always better to report, be told it’s not “reportable” and then move on with review of the situation. Not knowing whether or not to report is a sign of the administration’s incompetence but choosing to not report at all is just stupid.
Not reporting this seems to be a questionable decision, under the consent of the governing body no less. Per the PA DOH regulations…
Elopement—When a resident leaves premises or a safe area without authorization.
Interpretive Guidelines
Safe area means an area that is safe for the resident. This would be assessed for each resident on an individual basis. For instance, it may be safe for an alert and oriented resident to be in a courtyard, but it may not be safe for a resident with dementia to be in a courtyard.
Unauthorized absence means that a resident leaves the facility without staff being aware that the resident has done so.
Per CMS…
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.
While this was possibly not an elopement by CMS definition, it was at the very least an incident because a resident who was documented to need supervision from staff did not receive it. More of a concern is that the staff didn’t know the resident had left the activity(and that supervision ) and the county executive uses the term “near miss” when referring to a resident. I didn’t know our the safety of our precious seniors was “hit or miss”.
To 3:03, it is an elopement by both doh and CMS standards. A dementia resident got out of a safe supervised zone without staff knowledge or discovery. It is a reportable event per doh rules as well. On its own, it is not really a big deal and something that happens in most nursing homes at one point or another. In the context of Gracedale it may not be treated as a minor occurrence by the state since it constitutes a clear pattern of elopements that are more unique to Gracedale than a typical home as there have been several since last fall. Not reporting it likely results in a more severe doh outcome. What is a shame is that it is likely Gracedale has made improvements recently but one event can sink it all. It is obvious the problem is that the activities staff did not receive the elopement training the nursing staff received.There is typically more elopement potential from activities than nursing operations. The activities staff in a home are typically more concerned with “fun,” which is understandable on the surface but what is needed is training the activities employees that safety is the most important priority for all staff. Fun is secondary to safety/security.
Funny story. Lead/Founder on a local Nextdoor is super aggressive and harassing with anyone who doesn't agree with his positions. Pennsylvania Unified Judicial Systemc(great site BTW) shows his conviction for guess what-- harassment. Moral of the story, never know who is going to go psycho. Better safer than sorry I say .
The regulations are fairly clear about a definition of elopement in appendix PP. Every facility has an elopement policy that clearly defines the boundaries associated with elopement for their specific facility. Example. A parking lot can or can not be an acceptable place for cognitively intact residents. Another example is gracedales outside trail. Where it gets challenging...the policy also speaks to cognitively impaired who require supervision to be off our their unit. This would be a secured unit for significant cognitive impairment. In that case most policies will of course define off unit as an elopement. If they were to be supervised at all times off unit and the person supervising lost them but knew it and immediately found them....perhaps a grey area. However if they were freely roaming outside it is no question an elopememt according to most policies. DOH will ask to see your policy to determine elopement. Of course if your policy doesn't clearly outline the perimeter if you will then they could determine if it was or was not an elopement. There however there is really no grey area..it is or it isnt... would need a lot more information to definitely determine but if someone was to monitor and not leave that person unattended sounds like it was.
Good political?
There are bigger problems than this at Gracedale. Either they are acknowledged on this blog or stop blogging about Gracedale! If you are a rookie to long term care look up the regulations. If you don’t want to, go away. The facility is in trouble. Tell them, Bernie.
Comments that respond to other comments with “I agree” or “this” or Similar such remarks will be deleted unless you explain.
Perhaps it’s time to move on from this blog, Bernie. Those in control of the Northampton County council appear not to care about anything since they use this blog to bash each other or anything and anyone against what they believe is the state of Northampton County. Best to just let it crash and burn. Verbiage is apparently important so no more comments on this end.
Yes, good political is very important, especially in Northlander county
If you don’t like what BO or the blog says, stop looking at it. Simple solution.
TZ is just trying to cover her ass. Gracedale will be found guilty again of letting a resident out without knowledge. Face, the county sucks at running Gracedale. Sell it, cut your ties or resign TZ for lying.
Post a Comment