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
F0806
D

Failure to Honor Resident Food Preferences and Dietary Needs

Sandy Hook, Kentucky Survey Completed on 04-10-2025

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 honor food preferences for two residents, both of whom had communicated specific dietary needs and dislikes. One resident with diabetes mellitus, who was on a special diet, had requested to avoid bread, pasta, and desserts due to their impact on blood sugar levels, but continued to receive these items on her meal trays. Another resident expressed a dislike for broccoli and cauliflower but continued to receive these vegetables in her meals. Both residents had intact cognition and had communicated their preferences to staff, but these preferences were not consistently reflected in their menu tickets or the facility's dietary records. Observations and interviews revealed inconsistencies between the posted menus and the actual food served, with substitutions being made due to unavailable ingredients. Residents reported that the posted menus were not always followed, and they were not regularly given choices or asked about their food preferences. The facility's policy required that food preferences be identified and honored, with alternatives offered when residents refused certain foods, but this was not consistently implemented. Staff interviews indicated that food preferences were supposed to be collected upon admission, quarterly, and as needed, with changes communicated through clinical meetings and entered into a computer system. However, there were gaps in communication and documentation, as some staff were unaware of specific resident preferences, and the meal tracking system did not always account for dislikes in mixed vegetables. The Registered Dietitian and Account Manager did not consistently visit residents to update preferences, and the process for updating and honoring food preferences was not reliably followed.

An unhandled error has occurred. Reload 🗙