What Gets Measured Gets Counted: Food, Nutrition, and Hydration Non-Compliance in Ontario Long-Term Care Homes and the Role of Proactive Compliance Inspections, 2024

Kaitlyn R. Wilson, Laura C. Ugwuoke, Sofia Culotta, Lisa Mardlin-Vandewalle, June I. Matthews () and Jamie A. Seabrook ()
Additional contact information
Kaitlyn R. Wilson: Brescia School of Food and Nutritional Sciences, Western University, London, ON N6A 3K7, Canada
Laura C. Ugwuoke: Brescia School of Food and Nutritional Sciences, Western University, London, ON N6A 3K7, Canada
Sofia Culotta: Brescia School of Food and Nutritional Sciences, Western University, London, ON N6A 3K7, Canada
Lisa Mardlin-Vandewalle: Brescia School of Food and Nutritional Sciences, Western University, London, ON N6A 3K7, Canada
June I. Matthews: Brescia School of Food and Nutritional Sciences, Western University, London, ON N6A 3K7, Canada
Jamie A. Seabrook: Brescia School of Food and Nutritional Sciences, Western University, London, ON N6A 3K7, Canada

IJERPH, 2025, vol. 22, issue 11, 1-20

Abstract: Food and nutrition services are critical to the health of long-term care home (LTCH) residents, yet little is known about how regulatory inspections detect non-compliance with Food, Nutrition, and Hydration (FNH) standards. We conducted a cross-sectional study of administrative inspection data from all licensed LTCHs in Ontario, Canada. One inspection report was randomly selected per LTCH, yielding a sample of 623 LTCHs. The data were collected for the period spanning 1 January 2024 to 31 December 2024. The primary exposure was use of the FNH inspection protocol, and the outcome was FNH non-compliance, defined as at least one Written Notification or Compliance Order. Statistical analyses included chi-square tests for categorical variables and independent samples t-tests (including Welch’s t-tests where appropriate) for continuous variables, with effect sizes (Φ, Cramer’s V, Cohen’s d) reported to complement p -values. This study did not require research ethics review under Western University policy, consistent with Canada’s Tri-Council Policy Statement (TCPS 2, Article 2.2) regarding use of publicly available data. FNH non-compliance was identified in 12.2% ( n = 76) of all LTCHs, and in 43.7% of those using the FNH protocol. Use of the FNH protocol was associated with a higher likelihood of detecting FNH non-compliance compared with other inspection protocols ( p < 0.001, Φ = 0.55). LTCH ownership and inspection type were also associated with detection patterns. This exploratory study provides the first province-wide analysis of FNH non-compliance in Ontario LTCHs. Findings suggest that inspection protocols influence detection of FNH issues, underscoring the need for further comparative and qualitative research to understand the organizational factors underlying non-compliance.

Keywords: long-term care; legislation; regulations; inspections; food; nutrition; hydration; compliance; Ontario; Canada (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2025
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/22/11/1619/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/22/11/1619/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:22:y:2025:i:11:p:1619-:d:1778460

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().