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
F0689
D

Failure to Supervise Resident Resulting in Elopement

Marshalltown, Iowa Survey Completed on 04-24-2025

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

A deficiency occurred when a resident with Alzheimer's dementia and a history of wandering was not adequately supervised, resulting in the resident leaving the facility unsupervised. The resident, who had a BIMS score indicating intact cognition but was known to wander and required supervision for safety, was last seen walking toward the dining room. Staff assumed the resident had entered the dining room, but when a door alarm sounded, staff failed to immediately and thoroughly investigate the cause of the alarm or confirm the resident's whereabouts. Instead of conducting a prompt and comprehensive search, staff turned off the door alarm after a brief visual check and did not go outside to verify if anyone had exited the building. It was only after the resident could not be located inside that a head count and neighborhood search were initiated. The resident was eventually found several blocks away and returned to the facility without injury. Interviews revealed that staff did not follow the facility's policy, which required a visual check of the area around the exit, including outside the building, when a door alarm sounded. Documentation showed that the resident was considered at moderate risk for elopement due to his diagnosis and history, and the care plan directed staff to monitor and redirect him as needed. Despite these interventions, staff actions were insufficient to prevent the resident from leaving the facility, and the required protocols for responding to door alarms and missing residents were not followed as outlined in facility policy.

An unhandled error has occurred. Reload 🗙