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 Develop Individualized Discharge Plans Reflecting Resident Goals

Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania Survey Completed on 03-11-2026

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 develop and implement individualized discharge planning that addressed residents' discharge goals and incorporated those goals into their comprehensive care plans for two residents. One resident with schizophrenia, who was cognitively intact with a BIMS score of 15, had an MDS Section Q assessment indicating that the overall discharge plan was unknown and that no active discharge planning process was occurring for a potential return to the community. The resident’s comprehensive care plan, initiated months earlier and recently reviewed, contained no interventions, goals, or planning related to discharge preferences, discharge planning activities, or barriers to discharge, despite documentation that the resident expressed a desire to return to the community and live with his sister. The DON reported that the sister did not want the resident to live with her and that the resident’s complex history made community discharge difficult, but these considerations and barriers were not documented in the care plan. Another resident with dementia and moderate cognitive impairment, reflected by a BIMS score of 12, also had an MDS Section Q assessment documenting that the overall discharge plan was unknown and that no active discharge planning process was occurring for a return to the community. This resident’s comprehensive care plan, initiated after readmission following an unsuccessful discharge, did not include discharge planning goals, interventions, or evaluation of discharge options, even though the record showed the resident continued to express a desire to return home. The Social Services Director stated that the resident occasionally expressed a desire to go home but that discharge was considered unsafe due to the resident’s inability to care for herself and the home being described as uninhabitable; however, no discharge care plan addressing the resident’s stated preference, barriers to discharge, or alternative options had been developed. The NHA and DON were unable to provide documentation showing individualized discharge care plans for either resident.

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 🗙