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
F0847
E

Failure to Properly Explain Arbitration Agreement and Resident Rights

Richland, Washington Survey Completed on 06-25-2025

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 adequately explain the binding arbitration agreement (ADR) to residents or their representatives, including the right to refuse to sign and the right to cancel the agreement within 30 days, as required. For three residents reviewed, all of whom were cognitively intact and required varying levels of assistance with activities of daily living, the ADR was either not explained in detail, not presented as optional, or the residents were unaware of their right to cancel within 30 days. One resident reported feeling that signing the ADR was a condition of admission, while another stated they were not told about the cancellation option, and a third was unaware they had signed the ADR at all. Staff interviews revealed inconsistencies in the admissions process. The Admissions Director stated that all forms, including the ADR, were reviewed with residents or their representatives, and that the option to not sign and the cancellation period were explained. However, another staff member involved in admissions indicated they explained the ADR as a way to use arbitration instead of litigation, but only mentioned a 30-day cancellation period in relation to admission paperwork, not specifically the ADR. The Administrator confirmed the ADR was not a condition of admission and that staff had been trained on the process, but was unsure why residents felt the ADR was not explained.

An unhandled error has occurred. Reload 🗙