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
F0628
D

Failure to Notify Resident Representative and Ombudsman of Proposed Transfer

Silver Spring, Maryland Survey Completed on 02-18-2026

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 ensure that a resident’s representative and the Ombudsman were notified of a proposed transfer to another SNF. A complaint was submitted to the Office of Health Care Quality alleging that the facility attempted to transfer the resident for LTC without notifying the designated medical decision maker. The Business Office Manager (BOM) stated that the resident was identified for transfer because the facility was bed locked and needed to open beds for rehab, and also described a practice she called “Quid Pro Quo,” in which facilities with low census contacted them to obtain residents. The BOM believed Social Services had notified the representative but could not confirm this. The resident’s representative, identified as the medical decision maker known to the facility, reported learning of the proposed transfer only after another facility, Kensington Rehab, contacted a family member about accepting the resident. The Social Service Director (SSD) reported receiving a list of residents to be referred out due to the bed lock and stated that her usual process was to send referrals and then contact families. She acknowledged that she did not contact this resident’s representative about the proposed transfer, explaining that she was busy and that Kensington had reached out to the representative quickly. Record review showed that the SSD sent a referral to [NAME] Grove on 01/27/26 and another referral to Kensington Rehab on 02/04/26 before any documented communication with the resident’s representative about the transfer. The DON stated that other facilities do not contact them to obtain residents and denied any “Quid Pro Quo,” and also stated that the facility’s expectation is to discuss a proposed transfer with the resident or representative before sending referrals. The Ombudsman reported not being notified of the bed lock or of residents referred out for transfer.

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 🗙