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 Prevent Elopement of Cognitively Impaired Resident

Pinehurst, North Carolina Survey Completed on 05-08-2025

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 cognitively impaired resident with diagnoses including dementia, anxiety disorder, and brain cancer, and who was assessed as high risk for elopement, was able to leave the facility unsupervised through the main entrance. The resident, who was non-ambulatory and used a wheelchair, was found outside in the parking lot by a nurse aide, approximately twenty minutes after leaving the building. At the time of discovery, the resident was not wearing her assigned wanderguard bracelet, which was intended to prevent such incidents. Staff interviews and record reviews revealed that the resident's care plan included interventions such as placement of a wanderguard, redirection from exits, and notification of the DON for exit-seeking behaviors. However, on the day of the incident, the nurse assigned to the resident did not check for the presence of the wanderguard at the start of her shift, as required by physician orders. The nurse aide who last provided care to the resident could not recall if the wanderguard was in place, and the receptionist responsible for monitoring the main entrance was not present, as the incident occurred on a weekend when no receptionist was scheduled for that time. Facility staff, including the maintenance director and receptionist, described the wanderguard system and monitoring procedures, noting that the main entrance is typically monitored by a receptionist during certain hours and that the system is designed to alarm and lock if a resident with a wanderguard approaches. Despite these measures, the resident was able to exit undetected, and staff only became aware of the incident when the resident was found outside without her wanderguard. The event highlighted lapses in supervision and failure to ensure the effectiveness of elopement prevention interventions for a high-risk resident.

An unhandled error has occurred. Reload 🗙