Citations in South Carolina
Statistics, citations and compliance trends for long-term care facilities in South Carolina.
Statistics for South Carolina (Last 12 Months)
Financial Impact (Last 12 Months)
Latest citations in South Carolina
Failure to supervise a resident with severe dementia, impaired safety awareness, and a high fall risk led to an unwitnessed fall in a dayroom away from the nurses’ station. An RA placed the resident there after a shower and left the resident unattended while caring for another resident; the resident was later found on the floor with the arm twisted backward and was sent to the ED with a closed distal humerus fracture.
Failure to Protect a Resident from Inappropriate Touching A resident with severe cognitive impairment was inappropriately touched by another resident in the dining room. Staff interviews and record review showed a nurse witnessed the other resident rubbing the resident’s vaginal area over clothing, while another staff member reported the resident had touched her inappropriately and apologized after saying he thought she was a visitor. The incident was not immediately reported to the Administrator, and the resident representative later said the resident appeared withdrawn after being notified.
Failure to Timely Report Allegation of Abuse: A nurse witnessed one resident touch another resident inappropriately, but the incident was not reported within the required timeframe. The LPN separated the residents and addressed boundaries with the resident involved, but did not report the event because she believed the RN would notify the DON. The DON and Administrator later stated the incident had not been reported immediately as required.
Failure to report an allegation of abuse: A resident alleged that a nurse grabbed her arm and hurt her, but the DON did not create a reportable because there were no bruises. The DON and Acting Administrator stated allegations were investigated within two hours and were not reported if they were not substantiated.
A facility failed to document VS every shift for two residents despite physician orders. One resident had dementia, diabetes, UTI, and acute kidney failure; the other had hemiplegia, TIA, HTN, CKD, heart failure, and cystitis. Records showed multiple missing entries for O2 sat, pulse, respirations, temperature, and BP, and staff interviews confirmed that prior-shift VS were sometimes carried forward in the EHR instead of being obtained and documented each shift.
Failure to Follow Contact Precautions: A CNA entered a resident’s room without gloves, a gown, or hand hygiene despite contact precautions for ESBL and VRE. The CNA spoke with the resident, touched the resident’s bed sheet, and left without sanitizing her hands. The resident had osteomyelitis, ESBL resistance, VRE, and moderate cognitive impairment, and her care plan and orders required strict single-room isolation with contact precautions.
Failure to Supervise a High-Fall-Risk Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide supervision consistent with the assessed needs of a resident who was at high risk for falls. The resident was admitted for short-term rehabilitation after a left intertrochanteric femur fracture from a prior fall and had diagnoses including dementia, prior CVA, repeated falls, hypertensive heart disease, CHF, CAD, debility, and insomnia. The resident was nonverbal at baseline, communicated by nodding yes or no, and had a Morse Fall Scale score of 65, placing the resident in the high fall risk category. Therapy evaluations documented severe dementia, impaired safety awareness, poor sitting and standing balance, bilateral lower extremity weakness, and dependence for bed mobility, transfers, and ambulation. The resident’s care plan included fall-related interventions such as environmental safety monitoring, call light access, and participation in the Fall Management Program. Despite these documented risks and needs, the resident was left unattended in the dayroom by a restorative aide after being showered and dressed. The aide stated she placed the resident in the dayroom because she had been told the resident ate better when out of bed, then left the resident there with other residents but no staff while she cared for another resident. The dayroom was located away from the nurses’ station and was not within the direct line of sight of staff. While unattended, the resident had an unwitnessed fall and was found sitting on the floor against the wheelchair with the right arm twisted backward at the elbow. The resident indicated the arm hurt, EMS was called, and the resident was transferred to the ED, where a closed fracture of the right distal humerus was diagnosed. Facility documentation also noted the resident had a history of attempting to stand unassisted, and the post-fall investigation did not identify a definitive mechanism for the fall or explain why closer supervision had not been in place before the incident.
Failure to Protect a Cognitively Impaired Resident from Inappropriate Touching
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to protect Resident 15 from inappropriate touching by Resident 14. Resident 15 had diagnoses including dementia, hypertension, depression, and hyperglyceridemia, and her quarterly MDS showed a BIMS score of 2 out of 15, indicating severe cognitive impairment. Her care plan documented impaired memory, decreased ability to make appropriate decisions, reliance on others for assistance with daily needs, and difficulty maintaining attention and participating in meaningful activities. The incident involved Resident 14, who had diagnoses including hypertension, a left above-the-knee amputation, anxiety disorder, neurogenic bladder, and COPD, and whose admission MDS showed a BIMS score of 11 out of 15, indicating moderate cognitive impairment. Staff interviews and record review showed that a nurse witnessed Resident 14 rubbing Resident 15’s vaginal area on the outside of her clothing in the dining room. Another staff member reported that Resident 14 had touched Resident 15 inappropriately and that Resident 14 later said he thought Resident 15 was a visitor and apologized. The report also showed that the incident was not immediately reported to the Administrator when it occurred. The DON stated the nurse who witnessed the event separated the residents and reported it to the nurse assigned to the residents, but that nurse did not report the incident. The Administrator stated she was disappointed the event was not reported immediately. The resident representative later stated Resident 15 appeared withdrawn and not like her usual self after being notified, and said the facility had not been forthcoming with details about the situation.
Failure to Timely Report Allegation of Abuse
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to report an allegation of abuse within the regulated timeframe for 2 of 27 residents reviewed for abuse. The facility policy stated that suspected abuse, neglect, exploitation, misappropriation of resident property, or injury of unknown source must be reported immediately, defined as within 2 hours for allegations involving abuse or serious bodily injury, or within 24 hours for allegations that do not involve abuse or serious bodily injury. R15 was admitted with diagnoses including dementia, essential hypertension, depression, and pure hyperglyceridemia, and R14 was admitted with diagnoses including hypertension, left above-the-knee amputation, anxiety disorder, neurogenic bladder, and COPD. Staff interviews and record review showed that a nurse witnessed R14 touch R15 inappropriately in the dining room on 06/22/26, with the Social Services Director later stating the incident was reported to her on 06/24/26. The LPN stated she was told by an RN that R14 touched R15 inappropriately, separated the residents, discussed boundaries with R14, and did not report it because she thought the RN would report it to the DON. The DON stated she was made aware on 06/24/26 of an incident that had occurred a couple of nights earlier, and the Administrator stated the nurse assigned to the residents did not report the incident immediately.
Failure to Report Allegation of Abuse
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to report to the State Survey Agency an allegation of abuse involving Resident 1. On 03/21/26, the resident alleged that a staff member physically abused and neglected her, and the March 2026 grievance log documented a grievance filed by the resident on 03/22/26 stating, "Nurse grabbed her arm and hurt her." The facility policy titled Abuse and Neglect - Clinical Protocol stated that suspected or identified abuse is to be addressed and reported in a timely manner to appropriate agencies consistent with applicable laws and regulations. During interviews, the DON stated that no reportable was created for the incident because the resident did not have any bruises. The DON further stated that when an allegation is made, she creates a soft file and, if she does not report the incident, she gives the information to social services and does not keep any information she does not report. In a follow-up interview, the DON and Acting Administrator stated that allegations are investigated within two hours to determine whether they are reportable, and that if the allegation is not substantiated during that investigation, it is not reported.
Missed Vital Sign Monitoring for Two Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to check vital signs according to physician orders for 2 of 3 residents reviewed. One resident had diagnoses including metabolic encephalopathy, UTI, diabetes, hemiplegia and hemiparesis, dementia, and acute kidney failure. His care plan identified cognitive loss due to dementia, risk for impaired cardiac function, and a goal of avoiding complications. Although there was an order for vital signs every shift, the record showed multiple dates with missing entries for oxygen saturation, pulse, respirations, temperature, and blood pressure, and on several other dates only one set of vital signs was documented for the day. The second resident had diagnoses including hemiplegia and hemiparesis, TIA, hypertension, chronic kidney disease, heart failure, and acute cystitis. Her MDS showed moderate cognitive impairment, and her care plan included needs related to ADL and mobility decline, impaired cognitive function, and risk for impaired cardiac function. She also had an order for vital signs every shift, but the record showed missing entries for oxygen saturation, pulse, respirations, temperature, and blood pressure on multiple dates, with only one documented set on several other dates. During interview, the first resident’s family member stated the resident had been taken to the hospital and was severely dehydrated, had a very high sodium level, and had a UTI. She said he was a feeder and depended on staff for fluids throughout the day. An LPN stated vital signs are usually the CNA’s responsibility, but if a resident is brittle the nurse may take them, and that the nurse should not use the previous shift’s vital signs when the order is for every shift. The DON stated the electronic record may prepopulate prior vital signs from the last set taken, but her expectation was that if vital signs are ordered every shift, they must be documented every shift.
Failure to Follow Contact Precautions
Penalty
Summary
Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program was deficient when staff did not follow contact precautions for a resident with ESBL and VRE. The resident had diagnoses including osteomyelitis of the vertebra, osteomyelitis of the left ankle and foot, ESBL resistance, and senile degeneration of the brain. Her MDS showed a BIMS score of 9 out of 15, indicating moderate cognitive impairment, and she was dependent on others for all ADLs except eating and was non-ambulatory. Her care plan and order recap both directed strict single-room isolation with contact precautions for ESBL and VRE. During observation, a CNA entered the resident’s room without gloves, a gown, or hand hygiene. The contact precautions sign on the door indicated staff must put on gloves and a gown before entering, and supplies were hanging on the door. While in the room, the CNA spoke with the resident and placed her hands on the side of the resident’s bed sheet, then left without sanitizing her hands. In interview, the CNA stated staff are supposed to wear gloves and a gown and sanitize hands before entering and after leaving the room, and said she had only gone in to check whether the resident needed anything. The DON stated staff must put on gloves and a gown prior to providing care, and that if staff are only going in to ask a question they do not need PPE as long as they do not touch anything or provide care; she also stated the CNA should not have touched the bed sheet without gloves and a gown.
Find your facility
Search by name to see its inspection history, citations and penalties — and how to prepare for the next survey.
Get alerted when Immediate Jeopardy citations hit in South Carolina — free
You're all set
Compliance trends in South Carolina
Data through Jun 2026Comparisons below measure the most recent period Jul 2025 – Jun 2026 against the prior period Jul 2024 – Jun 2025 (two equal 12-month windows). The most recent 1 months are excluded because CMS is still publishing them.
Top tags by month · last 24 months
dashed = still reportingMonthly citation counts for the 5 most-cited tags. The dashed tail is the 1-month reporting lag.
Frequency movers
Biggest change in how often each tag is cited, as a rate per 100 inspections (so it isn't skewed by survey volume): Jul 2025 – Jun 2026 vs the prior period Jul 2024 – Jun 2025. Only tags with at least 20 citations in both periods are shown.
Severity movers
Tags whose average scope/severity shifted the most: Jul 2025 – Jun 2026 vs the prior period Jul 2024 – Jun 2025. The number is the average severity on the A–L scale (A=0…L=11); the letter is the band it falls in. A rise means the same tag is being cited at a more serious level — note the average can move enough to rank here while staying within the same letter. Same 20-citation minimum applies.
Care domain movers
Citations grouped into CFR care domains — F-tags by their §483 regulatory section (CMS State Operations Manual, Appendix PP) — measured as a rate per 100 inspections: Jul 2025 – Jun 2026 vs the prior period Jul 2024 – Jun 2025. Share is the domain's portion of citations this period; avg severity is the mean scope/severity letter and immediate jeopardy the percentage cited at J–L, both over the current period. Domains with at least 20 citations in both periods are shown; the sparkline tracks the last 12 months (left = oldest).
Immediate jeopardies · this period
Citations at the most serious scope/severity — J–L, immediate jeopardy, residents placed at risk of serious harm or death — over Jul 2025 – Jun 2026 vs the prior period Jul 2024 – Jun 2025. "Surveys with an IJ" counts distinct health inspections that had at least one.
Survey activity · by month
faded/dashed = still reportingCitations each month split into complaint-driven (unscheduled, triggered by grievances) vs standard surveys — bars, left axis — with the number of inspections as a line on the right axis. Rising inspections signal more scrutiny; a rising complaint share means more off-cycle surveys. The most recent 1 months are still being reported.
Deficiency-free survey rate
Share of health surveys that found zero deficiencies — the odds of a clean survey. Jul 2025 – Jun 2026 vs the prior period Jul 2024 – Jun 2025; the most recent 1 months are still being reported (dashed).
Penalties · by month
faded = still reportingTotal civil money penalty dollars imposed on the state's facilities each month — how hard the state is enforcing. The most recent 1 months are still being reported, and penalties often lag citations by several months.
Emerging tags
Tags that weren't established last period but surged — an early warning, distinct from movers (which track already-common tags). Criteria: fewer than 20 citations in the prior period, but at least 10 this period and 2.5× their prior volume. The sparkline shows monthly counts over the last 12 months (left = oldest).
Trusted data from CMS and state health departments
Every citation, penalty and Plan of Correction is sourced from public CMS records (latest release October 8, 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.
