Stay Ahead of Compliance with Monthly Citation Updates


In your State Survey window and need a snapshot of your risks?

Survey Preparedness Report

One Time Fee
$79
  • Last 12 months of citation data in one tailored report
  • Pinpoint the tags driving penalties in facilities like yours
  • Jump to regulations and pathways used by surveyors
  • Access to your report within 2 hours of purchase
  • Easily share it with your team - no registration needed
Get Your Report Now →

Monthly citation updates straight to your inbox for ongoing preparation?

Monthly Citation Reports

$18.90 per month
  • Latest citation updates delivered monthly to your email
  • Citations organized by compliance areas
  • Shared automatically with your team, by area
  • Customizable for your state(s) of interest
  • Direct links to CMS documentation relevant parts
Learn more →

Save Hours of Work with AI-Powered Plan of Correction Writer


One-Time Fee

$49 per Plan of Correction
Volume discounts available – save up to 20%
  • Quickly search for approved POC from other facilities
  • Instant access
  • Intuitive interface
  • No recurring fees
  • Save hours of work
F0604
D

Failure to Properly Assess and Document Seatbelt Use

Pinckney, Michigan Survey Completed on 04-03-2025

Penalty

No penalty information released
tooltip icon
The penalty, as released by CMS, applies to the entire inspection this citation is part of, covering all citations and f-tags issued, not just this specific f-tag. For the complete original report, please refer to the 'Details' section.

Summary

The facility failed to ensure proper documentation and assessment for the use of a seatbelt device on a resident, identified as R7, who was observed in a wheelchair with the seatbelt clasped. R7, who has severe cognitive impairment and a history of falls, was unable to independently release the seatbelt without cues and assistance. The facility did not have a physician's order, consent, or a current assessment for the seatbelt device, which was last assessed in 2021. The care plan inaccurately listed the seatbelt under 'falls' for safety, despite no indicators for restraint use being noted in the resident's assessments. The Director of Nursing (DON) claimed the facility was restraint-free and stated that the seatbelt was not considered a restraint because R7 could remove it with assistance. However, the seatbelt was not reassessed quarterly as required, and there was a discrepancy between the care plan and the family's understanding of the seatbelt's purpose. The family believed the seatbelt was for comfort due to R7's past work experience, while the facility's documentation suggested it was for trunk support and positioning. The lack of proper assessment and documentation led to the deficiency noted by the surveyors.

An unhandled error has occurred. Reload 🗙