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

$29 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
F0627
D

Failure to Involve Resident in Choice of Destination During Involuntary Discharge

Mattoon, Illinois Survey Completed on 01-29-2026

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 deficiency involves the facility’s failure to allow a cognitively intact resident to participate in choosing the destination facility during an involuntary discharge. The resident, who had paraplegia and multiple other medical conditions including moderate protein-calorie malnutrition, thoracic spinal cord injury, opioid dependence, neuromuscular bladder dysfunction, chronic pain, traumatic brain injury, neurogenic bowel, and a history of UTI, was issued an involuntary/emergency discharge with a receiving facility in another state already identified by the facility. The resident reported that he had lived in Kentucky before residing in Illinois, wanted to return to Kentucky, and was not asked where he wanted to go or offered any options in Kentucky. The resident stated he occasionally yelled at staff because they did not do what they were supposed to do and that he had spoken with the Ombudsman and the DON about his concerns. The Administrator stated that referrals were sent to multiple facilities and that one facility accepted the resident, after which the resident became upset about not being able to choose his destination or return to Kentucky. The Ombudsman reported that the resident had clearly expressed a desire to return to Kentucky and that this was communicated to the Administrator, who responded dismissively, and that the facility did not send referrals to facilities in Kentucky or allow the resident to participate in his own discharge. The Director of Admissions confirmed that he took over the discharge because the Administrator and Social Service Director no longer wanted to deal with the resident, that the resident was not permitted to suggest facilities, and that the involuntary discharge was issued with an accepting facility already identified by the facility. Facility policy required orientation and preparation of residents for facility-initiated discharges, and the Ombudsman pamphlet documented residents’ rights to participate in their own care planning, but the resident was not involved in selecting the discharge destination.

Long-term care team reviewing survey readiness and plan of correction

We Help Long-Term Care Teams Stay Survey-Ready

We process and analyze inspection reports and plan of correction using AI to extract insights and trends so providers can improve care quality and stay ahead of compliance risks.

Discover our solutions:

An unhandled error has occurred. Reload 🗙