Hospice notes not readily accessible and care plans lacked responsibility delineation
Summary
The facility failed to meet hospice care requirements for three residents by not ensuring hospice notes were readily accessible and by not developing comprehensive care plans that clearly delineated responsibilities between the facility and hospice. The report states that the facility provides hospice care under a written agreement and must ensure each resident’s written plan of care includes the most recent hospice plan of care and a description of the services furnished by the LTC facility. It also states that a designated IDT member is responsible for facilitating communication between the facility and hospice staff. Resident #3 had diagnoses including chronic systolic congestive heart failure, hypertensive heart disease with heart failure, dementia, and chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia. The resident’s MDS showed severe cognitive impairment and dependence on staff for most ADLs and mobility, and it indicated hospice services were being received. The comprehensive care plan identified hospice services, but it did not include delineation of care responsibilities between the facility and hospice. Although the EMR contained hospice recertifications and a hospice plan of care, it did not contain documentation of routine hospice care visits. Resident #58 was admitted for respite care and was receiving hospice services at home and at the facility upon admission. Her diagnoses included chronic respiratory failure, pulmonary hypertension, and anxiety disorder, and her MDS showed cognitive intactness with substantial to maximal assistance needed for most ADLs. Her hospice care plan was not initiated until 16 days after admission, during the survey process, and it did not include a delineation of care responsibilities between the facility and hospice. Resident #33 had diagnoses including COPD, depressive disorder, and CKD, and her MDS showed she was cognitively intact and needed supervision for personal hygiene and dressing. Her care plan identified hospice services but did not include detailed interventions or a delineation of care services between the facility and hospice, and her EMR contained hospice notes uploaded on one date with no other hospice notes uploaded until during the survey. Staff interviews showed the hospice NP said hospice staff documented in a binder at the facility and in the hospice company’s own electronic system, with weekly faxing of clinical documentation to the facility. LPNs said the hospice binder at the nurses’ station was used for communication and that hospice notes in the EMR were important for knowing what care was provided and whether there were changes in condition. The medical records director said hospice companies emailed weekly clinical documentation and that records should be uploaded into the EMR, but he also stated he had recently learned one resident was receiving hospice care and that the EMR was incomplete because hospice progress notes were not uploaded. The DON and regional clinical resource confirmed the binder and EMR were used for communication and stated hospice care plans should delineate responsibilities between the facility and hospice.
Penalty
Resources
Below are regulatory guidelines relevant to this citation:
Trusted data from CMS and state health departments
Every citation, penalty and Plan of Correction is sourced from public CMS records (latest release July 29, 2026) and official state health department websites — never guesswork.
In your survey window? See what surveyors are citing.
The Survey-Prep Report maps your facility's risk from 12 months of CMS and state citation data — what's being cited around you and what to check first. $129 one-time.