Bibb Medical Center Nursing Home
208 Pierson Ave, Centreville, AL 35042 · Government - County · 131 certified beds · (205) 926-3308 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
- its last standard health inspection was over 2 years ago — the star rating may not reflect current conditions
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's staffing and quality-measure ratings run 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself, and staffing on its payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 2 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 3 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 1 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 14.9% | 12.0% | 15.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 4.5% | 5.4% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.6% | 1.0% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.7% | 2.4% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.5% | 1.4% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.6% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 4.2% | 3.3% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 9.8% | 12.1% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 18.4% | 24.5% | 18.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 98.4% | 94.8% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 6.2% | 5.4% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 12.5% | 12.8% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 16.2% | 21.2% | 17.1% | typical |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 7.7% | 2.0% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 10.6% | 24.8% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 8.1% | 11.3% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.25 | 1.96 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 2.97 | 1.70 | 1.80 | worse |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
35.3% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 27 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 61.5% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 26 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.24 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 31% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 4% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 35.3%CMS range 23.1–55.3 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.3%CMS range 6.7–13.1 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 61.5% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 42.3% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 61.5% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 97.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 3.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 6.1% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.1%CMS range 4.3–12.4 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.15 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 131 beds and averages 108.3 residents a day — about 83% occupied, or roughly 23 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.23 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.40 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.10 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.84 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.39 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.52 to 0.09 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 53% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 2 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
9 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Potential for harm · F2023-11-30 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — widespreadEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews, the Resident Council Meeting on 11/29/2023, a test tray on 11/29/2023, and a facility policy titled, Food Service, the facility failed to ensure food was served warm, palatable and enjoyable. This had the potential to affect 114 of 114 residents receiving meals from the kitchen. Findings include: The facility's undated policy, Food Service documented: . PROCEDURES: . 4. A conscientious effort is made to make the food, trays, and service as attractive as possible. Resident Identifier (RI) #22 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. During tour of the facility on 11/27/2023 at 12:06 PM, RI #22 stated, most of the time food was cold, especially breakfast. RI #27 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. On 11/28/2023 at 5:15 PM RI #27 was eating dinner in his/her room. When asked about the food, RI #27 said, the food was cold but he/she was going to eat it because of being hungry. RI #27 said, the food was served cold frequently. During the Resident Council Meeting, held on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2023-11-30 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, the facility policy Proper Labeling of Food items , and the 2022 Food Code from the United State (U.S.) Food and Drug Administration (FDA); the facility failed to ensure: 1) food stored in the freezer was covered and sealed properly, outdated food was discarded and; 2) the temperature of blended (puree) foods was measured before serving to residents. This had the potential to affect 114 of 114 resident receiving food from kitchen. Findings Include: 1. The 2022 U.S. FDA Food Code included the following: 3-305.11 Food Storage. (A) . FOOD shall be protected from contamination by storing the FOOD: . (2) Where it is not exposed to splash, dust, or other contamination . On 11/27/2023 at 10:45 AM, during the initial kitchen tour an observation was made of food stored in the freezer. Salisbury steak was exposed to the air in an unsealed aluminum container. The lid to the container was not sealed properly and there was ice observed on the meat. The freezer contained roast beef in a plastic eight-quart container with use by 11/26/2023 date and four-quart…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2023-11-30 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and review of a facility policy titled Hand Hygiene, Laundry/Linen Distribution, and Handling Clean Linen the facility failed to ensure: 1) staff performed hand hygiene when a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) delivered meal trays, picked an item off the floor, and touched a resident's food, when a Laundry Aid (LA) delivered clean linen to eight different resident's rooms on the 200 hall, and before a Laundry Assistant (LAS) handled clean linen; 2) a LAS did not hold clean linens against her personal clothing; and 3) clean linen was covered while being transported on the 200 hall. These failure had the potential to affect Resident Identifier (RI) #53, RI #25, residents on the 200 hall, and all residents in the facility who received linen from the laundry room. Findings include: The facility policy with an effective date of 02/2001 and a review/revision date of 05/2021 titled Hand Hygiene revealed . POLICY: All staff will perform proper hand hygiene procedures to prevent the spread of infection to other personnel, residents, and visitors. This…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-11-30 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — patternHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, resident record review, and review of the facility policy Promoting/Maintaining Resident Dignity During Mealtimes, the facility failed to ensure Resident Identifier (RI) #38's lunch meal was not served on Styrofoam on 11/27/2023 and the staff delivering laundry gained permission to enter residents' rooms before entering on 11/27/2023. This had the potential to affect RI #38, one of 10 sampled residents observed at mealtime and residents residing on the 200 hall. Findings include: On 11/27/2023 at 12:53 PM, Laundry Aide (LA) #18 was observed delivering resident's clothing to room numbers 213, 211, 210, 208, 207, 204, 203, and 202, entering each room without knocking, announcing herself, or waiting for permission before entering. On 11/28/2023 at 8:40 AM during an interview with LA #18, she said, she should knock or ask to enter a resident room before going in. When the laundry aide was asked if she knocked on residents' doors before entering, she said, she did not. When asked…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-11-30 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, resident record reviews, and review of the Centers for Medicare & (and) Medicaid Services Long-Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument 3.0 User's Manual Version 1.18.11, the facility failed to ensure Resident Identifier (RI) #64's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 11/15/2023 was accurately coded for weight loss or gain and RI #114's quarterly MDS assessment with an ARD of 10/24/2023 was accurately coded to reflect RI #114 did not receive an anticoagulant medication during the assessment period. This had the potential to affect two of 29 sampled residents whose MDS assessments were reviewed. Findings include: The Long-Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument User's Manual documented: . Steps for Assessment for K0200B, Weight 1. Base weight on the most recent measure in the last 30 days. K0300: Weight Loss . Code 2, yes, .: if the resident has experienced a weight loss of 5% or more in the past 30 days or 10% or more in the last 180…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2019-08-22 · tag F0730 — widespreadObserve each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview, document review and a facility policy titled, Continuing Education, the facility failed to ensure 27 CNA's (Certified Nursing Assistants) had the required 12 hours of CEUs ( Continuing Education Units) training per year. This deficient practice affected 27 out 29 CNA's whose training records were reviewed. Findings Include: A review of a facility policy titled, Continuing Education, with an review/revision dated of 6/2001 documented: PURPOSE: To maintain sufficient continuing competence of Nurses Aides. POLICY: All Nurses Aides will be offered twelve (12) hours of continuing education per year .PROCEDURE: .3. Each must receive .twelve(12) hours .training per year . On 8/22/19 at 11:00 a.m, the Surveyor reviewed the CEU's training records for the CNA's employed by the facility from the last twelve months between their hire date (month/date). There was no documentation of the required 12 hours of CEU's, during a twelve month span, for 27 CNAs. On 8/22/18 at 11:23 a.m., an interview was conducted with EI (Employee Identifier) #1, DON (Director of Nurses). EI #1 was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2018-07-12 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews and a review of facility policies titled, Steamtable temperatures, Cleaning of food carts, and Handwashing Guidelines-Dietary Employees, the facility failed to ensure: 1) the temperatures were taken of all foods on the tray line; 2) food carts used to transport residents meals were not dirty and; 3) staff washed their hands when entering the kitchen. This had the potential to affect 113 of 113 residents who received meals from the kitchen. Findings Include: 1) Review of a facility policy titled, Steamtable temperatures, with no date revealed: .POLICY: All steamtable temperature will be checked and documented prior to food service. PROCEDURES: 1. All foods held on the steamtable will be checked and all temperature will be documented by the assigned dietary personnel prior to service. On 7/11/18 at 11:54 rice was brought to the steam table by (Employee Identifier) EI #4. Dietetic Assistant. EI #4 did not take the temperature of the rice, nor did EI #1, the Cook. On 7/11/2018 at 2:46 p.m., the surveyor conducted an interview with EI #1, the Productive…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · B2019-08-22 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — patternEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews and review of meal tray slips, the facility failed to honor each resident's specified food preferences. This affected Resident Identifier (RI) #72 and #85, two of 15 residents observed during meals. Findings included: 1) RI #72 was re-admitted to the facility on [DATE]. This resident was assessed on the 06/24/19 Quarterly Review Minimum Data Set (MDS) as cognitively intact with a score of 15 of a possible 15. On 08/21/19, during the 12 noon lunch meal, the surveyor observed RI #72 receive a lunch meal which included Spaghetti with Meat Sauce (not eaten), as well as a slice of toasted, buttered French Bread (not eaten), and a spinach salad, among other food items. The tray slip designated in the Notes section: Send crackers with salads.No bread as side item. The resident did not eat the bread sent on the tray, and no crackers had been included with the meal. 2) RI #85 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The most current Annual MDS assessment, date 7/20/10, documented this…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · B2019-08-22 · tag F0808 — failed to follow doctor-ordered diets — patternEnsure therapeutic diets are prescribed by the attending physician and may be delegated to a registered or licensed dietitian, to the extent allowed by State law.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and a review of residents' tray slips, the facility failed to ensure the salt or sodium restricted diets were followed. This affected two of three residents, Resident Identifier (RI) #72 and RI #62 for whom a salt restricted diet was ordered. Findings Included: The facility's Low Sodium Diet or 2300 mg Sodium (undated) included the following: Use . This diet is useful in preventing or controlling edema or hypertension. Diet Principles include: 1. Prepare all foods without salt and do not add salt at the table. Avoid all processed and prepared foods and beverages high in sodium . 1) RI #72 was re-admitted to the facility on [DATE]. RI #72 diagnoses included Essential Hypertension and Atherosclerotic Heart Disease. The most recent Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, date 6/24/19, identified this resident to have a cognitive (Brief Interview for Mental Status) score of 15 of a possible 15, indicating intact cognition. The Physician Order List specified a No Sweets, No…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| ALLGOOD, CHARLES | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 01/01/2021 |
| BELCHER, BRENT | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 06/24/2008 |
| CASH, RICHARD | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 06/24/2008 |
| DUNN, WILLIE | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 01/01/2021 |
| KEMMER, STEPHANIE | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 06/24/2008 |
| ROOKER, DAVID | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 06/24/2008 |
| SMITH, KAREN | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 12/01/2021 |
| SNELSON, GLENDA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 06/24/2008 |
| DESMOND, HEATHER | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 10/01/2005 |
| MARCHANT, JOSEPH | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2011 |
| CAHABA VALLEY HEALTH SERVICES INC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/06/2026 |
| PATIL, LATA | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/06/2026 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 17 rows in the source record cover these 12 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
What families pay in AL
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Alabama Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 015215. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2023-11-30, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.