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
F0641
B

Inaccurate MDS Assessments for Hospice and Discharge Status

Auburn, Massachusetts Survey Completed on 06-18-2025

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 complete accurate Comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments for two residents out of a sample of 30, as identified through record reviews and staff interviews. For one resident with multiple sclerosis and dementia, who was severely cognitively impaired and had an invoked health care proxy, the facility did not accurately code for hospice services on the MDS, despite the resident having a physician's order for hospice and being admitted to hospice services during the assessment period. The MDS nurse confirmed that hospice services should have been coded but were not, resulting in an inaccurate assessment that did not reflect the resident's status. For another resident with hypertension and atrial fibrillation, the facility failed to accurately code the discharge status on the MDS. The resident experienced an acute change in health status, was unresponsive with abnormal vital signs, and was transferred to the hospital for evaluation. Although the facility expected the resident to return at the time of transfer, the MDS was coded as 'discharge return not anticipated.' The MDS nurse acknowledged that the coding was inaccurate, as the correct code should have been 'discharge return anticipated' based on the circumstances at the time of transfer.

An unhandled error has occurred. Reload 🗙