********** The public policies that pertain to quality of care in nursing homes were last stated in 1986 Institute of Medicine (IOM) Report (Hawes, 1991) and subsequent Nursing Home Reform Act, which is part of 1987 Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (OBRA) (P.L. 100-203) legislation. These documents remain basis for regulating nursing home industry. State and federal regulations drive evaluation standards for nursing homes, and annual inspections help determine certification for both Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement. Despite considerable efforts, however, regulations cannot guarantee quality of care received by nursing home residents. One hurdle is lack of a universally accepted definition of quality. Donabedian (1988) conceived of quality of care in three categories: structure, process, and outcome. Structure refers to attributes of physical setting (that is, facility, equipment, money), human resources (that is, number and qualifications of personnel), organizational structure, and methods of reimbursement. Process refers to hands-on patient care. Outcome refers to effects of care on patient and patient satisfaction with that care. The three categories are interconnected--good structure increases likelihood of good process, which increases likelihood of good outcomes--and together constitute quality of care. Regulations concentrate on process and structural aspects of quality of care because they are easy to measure and document. Nursing homes routinely collect and report information about their performance. Our case study site measures quality of clinical care with 24 clinical quality indicators including fractures, weight loss, prevalence of pressure ulcers, use of antipsychotic medications, and so forth. These indicators are monitored on a monthly basis. Structural characteristics such as staff-to-patient ratios, and process assessment (the provision of actual health care) are used as proxy measures to demonstrate quality, but compliance with regulations on those measures will still not ensure that resident receives quality care (Davis, 1991). Outcome assessment is most consumer-oriented portion of Donabedian's framework; it alone addresses actual impact of care on resident's physical and emotional well-being (Davis, 1991). The IOM committee, in 1986, and Congress, in 1987 OBRA regulations, agreed that it was important to focus on the quality of life experienced by residents, as well as making regulations more resident-centered and outcome-oriented [emphasis added] (Hawes, 1991, p. 158). Resident-centered care emphasizes quality of care as defined by resident. Although views of all stakeholders are important, it is vital to focus on residents' views because they may not agree with views of others about importance of many items (Young, Minnick, & Marcantonio, 1996), and they are difficult to assess accurately. Many believe there has been too little emphasis on quality aspects most meaningful to residents (Davis, Sebastian, & Tschetter, 1997). A customer satisfaction survey can monitor concerns about nursing home quality. In fact, a survey can empower residents, because its primary purpose is to communicate the point of view of people for whom long-term care services are created in first place (CohenMansfield, 2000, p. 1). Despite well-known limitations to surveys of nursing home residents (such as fear of reprisals, difficulty in interviewing residents with dementia, disagreement about what to measure), satisfaction surveys may be best way to comprehend and address resident-identified problems. It is interesting that quality assurance mechanisms that have looked at other areas are now beginning to focus on resident rights and on techniques to assess resident satisfaction with care (Applebaum, Straker, & Geron, 2000). Social workers are essential to this type of assessment given their communication and interpersonal skills and training. …