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
F0604
D

Failure to Document and Justify Use of Physical Restraint (Wander Guard)

Sunland, California Survey Completed on 12-04-2025

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 follow its own policy and procedure regarding the use of physical restraints, specifically in the application and documentation of a wander guard device for a resident. The resident in question was admitted with diagnoses including hemiplegia following a stroke, aphasia, and severe cognitive impairment. Despite the resident's cognitive status, multiple assessments and monitoring sheets indicated that the resident did not exhibit wandering behavior during their stay, and there were no documented episodes of elopement or attempts to leave the facility. Physician orders were in place for the use of a wander guard, and the resident was monitored hourly, but documentation supporting the ongoing need for the device was inconsistent. The resident's care plan and risk assessments fluctuated, at times indicating risk for elopement and at other times not, without clear rationale documented for these changes. Staff interviews confirmed that the resident refused to wear the wander guard and that there were no observed incidents of wandering or exit-seeking behavior. The facility's policy classified the wander guard as a physical restraint, requiring specific documentation and justification for its use, which was not consistently present in the resident's record. The lack of proper documentation and justification for the use of the wander guard, as required by facility policy, resulted in a deficiency. Staff and leadership acknowledged that the absence of supporting documentation for the restraint could violate the resident's rights and potentially result in psychological harm. The facility's own policies also required that episodes of wandering or exit-seeking behavior be documented in the medical record, along with the interventions used and their effectiveness, which was not done in this case.

An unhandled error has occurred. Reload 🗙