Food was not consistently temped before leaving the kitchen, and a test tray showed both hot and cold items served at improper temperatures. The DAM could not produce food temp logs, dietary staff only recorded four item temps before tray line, and a tray sent to a hall had a ham & cheese sandwich, coleslaw, lettuce and tomato, and mixed fruit all outside expected temp ranges. Residents also reported that room trays were often hot when they should be cold and cold when they should be hot.
Food temperature monitoring was deficient when the kitchen only recorded temps for main menu items and did not record alternate or always available items before serving them. Surveyors and the DDS confirmed the issue during a kitchen walkthrough, and residents reported hard bread, cold food, and poor meal quality. The facility policy required hot foods above 135 degrees F and cold foods below 41 degrees F, with temps taken before, during, and after service.
Meals were served in a way that did not match meal tickets or resident preferences. Several residents were given tough pork without the gravy listed on the ticket, and multiple residents described the food as bland or inedible. Other residents reported being repeatedly served chicken despite stating they disliked it, and some said alternate selections were not consistently offered when they refused the meal.
Food service failed to provide palatable, attractive meals at an appetizing temperature. During meal observation, residents and staff reported overcooked, brown, mushy cauliflower, and one resident on a puree diet received the wrong entrée while others did not receive ordered double portions or a prescribed supplement. A cook confirmed a prepared puree item was missed during service.
Meals were not palatable or attractive for multiple residents. Residents reported that the food was terrible, sometimes cold, and did not taste good, and one resident said they ordered all of their food in because of the poor quality. Surveyors observed a sample tray with a hamburger and french fries that looked unappetizing, with mushy, pale fries and an unseasoned hamburger, and an RN consultant confirmed the meal looked unappetizing.
The facility failed to ensure food was palatable, attractive, and maintained at a safe and appetizing temperature, as shown by tray temperature checks and interviews with several residents and staff. At lunchtime, kitchen staff were not taking or recording temperatures for items on the always-available menu, including beef patties, hotdogs, and brown gravy, before meal service began. The DDS acknowledged that temperatures for these always-available menu items were not being monitored or documented.
Surveyors found that meals were not consistently served in an appealing manner, with several residents reporting that the food was not good and that they often chose alternate menu items or food brought by family. Observations showed a plated chicken entrée where the dinner roll was placed on the same plate and became soggy from tomato sauce, and a puree meal with BBQ formed into a firm round shape, runny baked beans, and stiff puree bread that was difficult to mash. In the dining room, multiple residents left before dessert was offered and therefore did not receive it, and staff acknowledged dessert should have been served with the meal.
Food was not served at a safe and appetizing temperature during lunch meal service on a memory care unit. A test tray checked by the HCSG DM in the presence of the Administrator showed a hotdog at 110.7°F, baked beans at 128.9°F, chicken noodle soup at 146°F, and vanilla ice cream at 27.4°F, below or outside the Food Code temperature standards for hot and cold foods. Two residents also reported poor food quality.
Surveyors found that the facility did not consistently provide palatable meals at safe and appetizing temperatures, nor did it always follow the posted menu. During observed lunches, residents were served non-breaded pork chops instead of the advertised breaded pork chops and reported the meat was tough and hard to chew; on another day, residents reported grilled chicken was rubbery and too tough to eat after it had been baked and then held in a steamer. Resident council minutes documented repeated complaints over several months about late meals and cold food. A tray line observation showed hot foods initially within required temperature ranges, but a test tray delivered to a unit later had hot items below 135°F and a cold item above 41°F. Multiple residents reported that their food was usually cold, unpalatable, and that requests for alternative items were not consistently honored.
Food and drink were not served in a palatable, attractive, and safe temperature. Based on tray temperature checks, resident interviews, and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure hot foods were served hot. This issue was identified on all three meal trays tested during the survey process, including trays for two residents.
Self-audit
Pick a level of detail and, optionally, what to focus on — then generate a survey-ready checklist distilled from the most recent citations.
Beta · AI-generated — for reference only, not professional advice. Verify against current CMS guidance before relying on it. Assisto accepts no responsibility for how this checklist is used.
Citations used to create this checklist
Trusted data from CMS and state health departments
Every citation, penalty and Plan of Correction is sourced from public CMS records (latest release August 26, 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.