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
F0803
E

Failure to Provide and Follow Therapeutic and Portion-Specific Menus

Mount Pleasant, South Carolina Survey Completed on 04-10-2025

Penalty

Fine: $7,599
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 that menus met the nutritional needs of residents, were prepared in advance, followed, updated, and reviewed by a dietitian, and that they met the specific needs of each resident. Observations and interviews revealed that menu spreadsheets for portion sizes and therapeutic diets were either missing or not followed for several residents. The general menus in use did not match the planned menu spreadsheets and lacked details for therapeutic diets and portion sizes. Staff relied on old menus and verbal instructions for serving sizes, and there was no consistent documentation or guidance for preparing meals according to residents' prescribed diets. For three residents reviewed, there were discrepancies between their prescribed diets and the meals served. One resident with a pureed, renal, and large portion diet was served meals that did not align with a renal or pureed menu, and the breakfast menu did not include a pureed or renal option. Another resident on a mechanically altered, no added salt diet received a meal that did not correspond to a mechanically altered menu. A third resident on a carbohydrate-controlled, no added salt diet was served a meal that did not reflect a CCHO menu. In each case, the general menu used did not provide for the specific dietary needs or textures required by the residents' orders. Interviews with the kitchen manager and registered dietitian confirmed that menu spreadsheets for the current menus were still being developed, and staff were using old menus or making substitutions without proper documentation for side dishes or portion sizes. The kitchen manager admitted to not having clear spreadsheets for staff to follow and instead provided verbal instructions on serving sizes. The lack of up-to-date, detailed menus and portion guidance led to inconsistencies in meal preparation and serving for residents with therapeutic and texture-modified diets.

An unhandled error has occurred. Reload 🗙