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
F0578
D

Conflicting Advance Directive Documents for a Resident’s Code Status

Greensboro, North Carolina Survey Completed on 01-10-2026

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 facility failed to maintain accurate and consistent advance directive information for one resident when conflicting code status documents were kept in the paper advance directive binder at the nursing station. The resident, who had cancer, generalized muscle weakness, and moderately impaired cognition, had a bright yellow/orange Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) form in the binder indicating DNR status with no expiration date. The same binder also contained a Medical Order for Scope of Treatment (MOST) form signed by the resident’s Nurse Practitioner that directed staff to attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) if the resident had no pulse and was not breathing. At the same time, the resident’s electronic medical record contained a physician’s order for full code/CPR, and the care plan documented the resident as a full code. The Social Worker reported that she was responsible for obtaining advance directives at or shortly after admission, reviewing them with the resident or family depending on cognition, and then placing the signed forms in the provider’s box for review, after which nursing staff were responsible for documenting and retaining the orders. The nurse assigned to the resident stated that in an emergency she would look for advance directive information either in the 3-ring binder at the nursing station or in the EMR, indicating reliance on both sources. During interviews, the Social Worker acknowledged the potential for confusion caused by having both the DNR and MOST forms in the binder, and the DON and Regional Nurse Consultant confirmed that the DNR form should not have been in the binder and likely came from the hospital, yet it remained stored with the resident’s advance directive documents, creating inconsistent and contradictory information regarding the resident’s code status.

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 🗙