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
F0552
D

Failure to Obtain and Document Informed Consent for Psychotropic Medications

Peabody, Kansas Survey Completed on 06-23-2025

Penalty

Fine: $99,45012 days payment denial
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 two residents and/or their representatives were properly informed and provided with documented consent regarding the use of psychotropic medications. Review of the Psychoactive Medication Therapy Informed Consent Form logbook revealed that consent forms for multiple psychotropic medications, including Invega, Haldol, Abilify, lithium, Ativan, trazodone, and Zyprexa, lacked signatures from the appropriate residents or their guardians. Specifically, consent forms for one resident were missing the resident's signature, while consent forms for another resident were missing the guardian's signature. Additionally, the electronic medical records for both residents did not contain documentation of informed consent for these medications. Interviews with facility staff indicated confusion and lack of clarity regarding the process for obtaining and documenting informed consent. Social Services staff reported being newly assigned to the task and were unaware of the requirement for guardian signatures when applicable. Administrative nursing staff acknowledged the missing signatures and described a practice of signing consent forms in advance or delegating the task to others, which resulted in incomplete documentation. The facility's policy required discussion of risks and benefits with residents or responsible parties, but this was not consistently documented or followed.

An unhandled error has occurred. Reload 🗙