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
F0757
D

Administration of Medication Despite Documented Allergy

Kings Mountain, North Carolina Survey Completed on 08-12-2025

Penalty

Fine: $81,310
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 resident with a documented allergy to tubersol was administered a Mantoux test using tubersol, despite clear indications in the admission paperwork and on the Medication Administration Record (MAR) that the resident had an allergy to this substance. The allergy was noted in the resident's records, although the specific reaction was not detailed. The nurse administered the test and only realized the allergy after the fact, at which point the Nurse Practitioner (NP) was notified. The resident was monitored and experienced a mild skin reaction at the injection site, which was managed according to subsequent medical orders. Interviews with facility staff, including the Director of Nursing (DON), pharmacist, NP, and Administrator, confirmed that the allergy was documented and should have been checked prior to administration. The pharmacist emphasized the risk of administering a medication to someone with a known allergy, and the NP stated that staff are expected to verify orders before giving any medication. The incident was attributed in part to previous instability in the DON position, which had led to ongoing medication errors within the facility.

An unhandled error has occurred. Reload 🗙