Failure to Honor Residents’ Right to Choose Attending Physician
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to honor residents’ rights to choose their attending physician when new company management terminated services of an existing physician (Physician A) and limited residents’ options to two company-selected physicians (Physician B and Physician C). The facility’s own Resident Rights policy and admission packet state that residents have the right to self-determination, to choose their physician, and to designate which health care professionals will be involved in their care. Despite this, company leadership issued a 30‑day termination of services notice to Physician A, and the Administrator acknowledged that residents were only given the choice of Physician B or Physician C, even though she could see no reason why Physician A could not continue to see residents. Resident #1, who had no cognitive impairment and required partial assistance with ADLs due to hemiplegia, had Physician A listed as the attending physician on the face sheet. A letter dated 04/20/26, addressed to this resident, informed them that Physician A’s services were being terminated and that they must choose either Physician B or Physician C; the resident refused to sign because Physician A was not offered as an option. Resident #1 reported feeling anxious and upset, stated that the new company was forcing a change in primary care physician, and said the facility gave no reason why Physician A could not remain their physician. Resident #1 also reported having to comfort another resident who was crying about losing access to Physician A. Resident #2, who also had no cognitive impairment, used a walker, and had diagnoses including anxiety, depression, and hypertension, likewise had Physician A listed as attending physician and received a similar 04/20/26 letter indicating Physician A would no longer be with the facility and requiring selection of a new physician from the two listed. The Social Services Clerk told this resident they needed to pick another physician, and the resident signed the letter with Physician B circled, later stating they felt forced into choosing another physician and were anxious because they did not recognize the new physician’s name or have contact information. Resident #3, with no cognitive impairment, heart failure, bipolar disorder, and a guardian, also had Physician A listed as physician and was told by the Social Services Clerk that Physician A could no longer be their physician; no letter documenting this change was found in the record. Resident #3 reported being upset, nervous, and depressed, and their guardian stated they were told by the Administrator that they had to choose a different physician, initially being told Physician A could still come, then later that Physician A had been sent a 30‑day notice and would not return. Physician A confirmed receiving the termination letter, stated he held an active license in good standing, and reported being told by the Administrator that the new company wanted to use its own doctors and that he would no longer be allowed to see residents, despite his willingness to continue under existing protocols. The Social Services Clerk and DON both acknowledged that residents should be able to choose their physician and that the directive to remove Physician A came from company management.
Penalty
Resources
Below are regulatory guidelines relevant to this citation:
A resident with severe cognitive impairment and multiple diagnoses was admitted without a signed consent for treatment by facility providers, as the legal guardian insisted on exclusive care by VA providers. Despite this, staff obtained or attempted to obtain medical orders from facility providers on several occasions, contrary to the guardian's directives and without proper authorization.
Failure to Ensure Resident Received Care Only from Approved Physicians
Penalty
Summary
This facility failed to ensure that a resident received care and services only from approved physicians, as required. The resident in question was admitted with diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease, heart disease, and obstructive sleep apnea, and had a severely impaired cognitive status as indicated by a BIMS score of 3 out of 15. The resident's legal guardian, who was also the daughter, refused to sign the facility's consent for treatment and insisted that all medical care be provided exclusively by VA providers. The guardian also took responsibility for scheduling and notifying the VA for all appointments, declining involvement from the facility's medical director or related providers. Despite the lack of consent for treatment by facility providers, there were multiple instances where facility staff either attempted to obtain or did obtain medical orders for the resident. These included a new order for Depakote from a CNP for increased agitation, notification of a provider regarding leg swelling, and a treatment order for a skin injury after the medical director's group was contacted. Interviews with the Administrator and DON confirmed that the facility did not have a signed consent on file and that staff actions were taken without the required authorization from the resident's legal guardian.
Trusted data from CMS and state health departments
Every citation, penalty and Plan of Correction is sourced from public CMS records (latest release June 24, 2026) and official state health department websites — never guesswork.
Trusted by long-term care providers and associations.
