No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Enterprise Health & Rehabilitation Center

300 Plaza Drive, Enterprise, AL 36331 · Non profit - Corporation · 257 certified beds · (334) 347-9541 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Flagged for abuse3 immediate-jeopardy citations$85,230 in federal fines1 Medicare payment denial
Insights

This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.

In its favor
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • CMS has flagged it for abuse
  • it has abuse, neglect, or exploitation citations (F0600, F0607) — most recent Jan 2026
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • inspectors cited 3 immediate-jeopardy problems — the most serious level
  • the CMS record shows $85,230 in federal fines (most recent 2026-01-18)
  • its payroll-based staffing score sits well above its independent inspection score
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
  • its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)

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.

1/5
CMS overall
1 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 1 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 4 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 2 of 5

Worth a closer look. This home's staffing rating runs 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the staffing score rests on the facility's own payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★ 4/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
6582 Boll Weevil Cir · (334) 347-2027 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
6580 Boll Weevil Cir · (334) 417-4111 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
Bshsh0.5 mi
1303 E Park Ave
Park
Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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 2 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 2 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.

Overall rating2★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased23.3%12.0%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight4.0%5.4%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder1.7%1.0%0.9%worse
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection10.2%2.4%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.3%1.4%6.5%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.6%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury1.4%3.3%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened25.6%12.1%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication26.9%24.5%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%94.8%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers2.4%5.4%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control13.8%12.8%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table20.1%21.2%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication1.5%2.0%1.4%typical
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine98.2%80.3%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission20.6%24.8%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit11.8%11.3%12.0%typical
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.431.961.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.401.701.80better

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.

51.5% 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 98 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

51.5%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
9.9%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
57.1%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.27U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.10hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.13hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.03hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 57.1% 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 49 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 0.27 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 39% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 2% 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
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF51.5%CMS range 43.3–59.651.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF9.9%CMS range 7.0–15.510.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no 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 discharge57.1%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 discharge49.0%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge61.2%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this 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 dischargenot 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 stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened6.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization5.6%CMS range 2.7–11.47.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.631.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS 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

0.64
RN hours/ resident / day
1.08
LPN hours/ resident / day
3.47
Aide hours/ resident / day
5.19
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.32
RN hoursweekends
40.5%
Total nursing turnover
47.8%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 257 beds and averages 156.8 residents a day — about 61% occupied, or roughly 100 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. 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 5.19 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.64 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.47 is at or above 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 4.37 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.52 on weekdays — 21% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.78 to 0.32 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 40% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.

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

1
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-01-18)
4
at the previous standard inspection (2019-11-06)

Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. 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.

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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.

12 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Immediate jeopardy · J2026-01-18 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
    Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
    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's medical records, review of Facility Reported Incidents (FRIs) received by the State Agency, the facility's investigative files, and facility policies titled Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation, Social Media Use, Cell Phones, and Confidentiality Statement, the facility failed to protect the residents' right to be free from sexual abuse perpetrated by other residents, physical abuse perpetrated by other residents, and exploitation/mental abuse perpetrated staff. Specifically:1. On 02/11/2025 the facility failed to protect Resident Identifier (RI) #168's right to be free from sexual abuse. On 02/11/2025 around 7:30 PM, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #13 was making rounds on the Memory Care Unit (MCU) and observed RI #168 sitting on RI #97's bed. CNA #13 observed RI #97 fondling RI # 168's genitalia with his/her hand in RI #168's brief. RI #168 had history of wandering into other residents' rooms. RI #97 had a known history of touching staff in a sexually inappropriate manner.…

    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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Immediate jeopardy · J2026-01-18 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolated
    Develop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
    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's medical records, review of Facility Reported Incidents (FRIs) received by the State Agency, the facility's investigative files, and the facility policy titled Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation, the facility failed to ensure its abuse policy was implemented to establish a safe environment and implement protocols for preventing, identifying, and investigating an allegation of sexual abuse on 02/11/2025. On 12/18/2024 Resident Identifier (RI) #97 began having documented episodes of sexually inappropriate behaviors towards staff. Progress notes in RI #97's medical record included seven entries of sexually inappropriate behaviors documented by six different staff members from 12/18/2024 until 02/11/2025. At that time, RI #97's room was in the facility's Memory Care Unit (MCU) which was identified by staff as a unit with wandering residents who have decreased cognition. RI #168 was on the MCU for wandering behaviors including entering other residents' rooms. On 02/11/2025 around 7:30 PM,…

    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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Immediate jeopardy · J2026-01-18 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — isolated
    Set up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review, interview, the facility's policy titled Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation, and the facility plan titled Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) Plan the facility failed to implement an effective QAPI program related to a resident-to-resident sexual abuse incident.Specifically, the facility's Quality Assurance Committee failed to review the incident to verify that a thorough investigation was conducted, failed to the incident as abuse, and failed to analyze contributing risk factors including residents wandering without supervision on a unit with a resident who had a documented history of sexually inappropriate behavior toward staff. Additionally QAPI failed to identify the need for systemic actions, as the involved resident was later returned to the unit without documented safeguards, and staff were not provided direction to ensure supervision of wandering, cognitively impaired residents in a manner that prevented entry into other resident's rooms without supervision. These failures allowed unsafe conditions to persist and placed residents at risk…

    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.

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2026-01-18 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure 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 facility policies titled, Date Marking and Food Safety, Kitchen Hood Inspection and Cleaning, and Automated Ware Washing Policy, the facility failed to ensure food items in dry storage and the freezer were labeled with use by dates; the vents in the stove hood were free of dust and grease; and plates and bowls were dried properly before being used to serve food to residents. These deficient practices created the potential for cross-contamination and/or foodborne illnesses. These deficient practices had the potential to affect 162 of 162 residents who received meals from the kitchen. Findings Include: 1) A review of a policy titled, Date Marking for Food Safety, with a Reviewed/Revised: dated of 10/2025, revealed. Policy The facility adheres to a date marking system to ensure the safety to. food items. Procedure and Compliance Guidelines for Staffing: . 2. The food shall be clearly marked to indicate the date by which the food was . opened.3. The individual opening . a food . shall be responsible for date marking the food at the time the food is…

    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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-01-18 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview, review of the Online report submitted to State Agency and facility policy, titled Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation the facility failed to report an allegation of sexual abuse on 02/11/2025 to local law enforcement when Resident Identifier (RI) #97 was found with his/her hands in RI #168's brief.This affected two out of six residents sampled for abuse.Findings include:Review of the facility's policy titled, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation, with a revised date of 01/01/2024 documented: Policy: It is the policy of this facility to provide protection for the health, welfare and rights of each resident by developing and implementing written policies and procedures that prohibit and prevent abuse. Definitions: Sexual Abuse is non-consensual sexual contact of any type with a resident. Law enforcement is the full range of potential responders to elder abuse. including: police, sheriffs, detectives, public safety officers, corrections personnel; prosecutors, medical examiners; investigators and coroners. VII. Reporting /Response A. The facility will have written procedures…

    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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2019-11-06 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure 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: STORAGE OF FOOD AND SUPPLIES, DRYING OF DISHES & UTENSILS, TEMPERATURE OF WALK-IN FREEZER, WALK-IN COOLER, AND ICE CREAM FREEZER and a TEMPERATURE LOG document, the facility failed to ensure: 1. meats in the freezer were labeled and sealed; 2. the temperatures of the freezer and cooler were recorded on the temperature log; and 3. utensils were not wet in utensil bags and in a silverware holder. This had the potential to affect 184 of 184 residents who received meals from the kitchen. Findings Include: 1) A review of a policy titled, STORAGE OF FOOD AND SUPPLIES with a last revised date of 2/16 revealed: . PROCEDURE . G. Cover all cooked foods with plastic wrap or other covering prior to storage to protect from dripping or contamination. H. All left overs are to be labeled with the contents and date. On 11/3/2019 at 9:34 a.m., the surveyor toured the freezer with (Employee Identifier). EI #11, [NAME] number one. The surveyor observed some type of cooked meat in the freezer. The meat was labeled with a date…

    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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-11-06 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
    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, review of a lab report and review of a facility policy titled, PERINEAL CARE POLICY AND PROCEDURE, the facility failed to ensure the Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) cleaned Resident Identifier (RI) #63 in a manner to assure the perineal area was thoroughly cleaned of bowel movement and in a manner to reduce the potential for urinary tract infection. This was observed on 11/3/19 and affected one of two residents observed for incontinent care. Findings Include: A review of a facility policy titled, PERINEAL CARE POLICY AND PROCEDURE with a revised date of 10/24/12 revealed Purpose: To maintain skin integrity, reduce opportunity for urinary tract infection, promote comfort. B. Performance of Perineal Care . 2. Continue procedure until perineal area thoroughly cleaned. A review of a lab report document for RI #63 revealed . specimen CLEAN CATCH URINE (collected 9/16/19) . Organism Identified . Escherichia coli . RI #63 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-11-06 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — isolated
    Ensure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
    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, review of residents meal tray cards and review of facility policies titled, Main Dining Room Protocol and Resident Meal Tray Preparation, the facility failed to ensure residents received foods that were listed on their tray cards matched foods received on their meal trays. This was observed on 11/3/19 lunch and supper meals and affected three of 15 residents whose trays cards were reviewed for meals. This deficient practice was cited as a result of the investigation of complaint # AL00036218, and affected (Resident Identifier) RI #128, RI #132 and RI #139. Findings Include: A review of a facility document titled, Main Dining Room Protocolwith a revised date of 7/25/13, revealed . 3. Nutrition Services will place all food and beverage on meal try, following tray cards and selective menus for accuracy. A review of a facility policy titled, Resident Meal Tray Preparation with a date of 11/6/09 revealed 1. Read the tray card. a. Right resident b. Right food/liquid consistency c.…

    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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-11-06 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    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 a facility policy titled, Proper Linen Handling, the facility failed to ensure the Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) did not place soiled linen she removed from Resident Identifier (RI) #63's bed, during incontinent care on the floor beside the bed. This was observed on 11/3/19 and affected one of two residents observed for incontinent care. Findings Include: A review of a facility policy titled, Proper Linen Handling with a revised date of 10/2017 revealed Purpose: To provide guidelines for handling of resident's soiled linens. In resident rooms: . 3. Deposit soiled laundry/linens . sheets . under pads in clear plastic bag . RI #63 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Per departmental notes RI #63 had a personal history of urinary tract infections. On 11/03/19 at 5:15 PM, Employee Identifier (EI) #6 and EI #7 entered RI #63's room to provide incontinent care. EI #6 removed the soiled linens from the bed and placed the soiled linens 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2018-11-01 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure 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 observation, interview and review of the facility policy titled, FOOD TEMPERATURES, the facility failed to ensure the temperature of Brussels sprouts was taken prior to serving for lunch on 10/30/2018. This had the potential to effect 130 residents who received Brussels sprouts for the lunch meal. Finding Include: A review of the facility policy titled, FOOD TEMPURATURES, with a last revised date of 07/2014, revealed, . PROCEDURE .B. Temperature of foods must be taken from the stream table 10 minutes before the first tray assembly and must be recorded. The acceptable temperature of hot food is greater than 135 degrees Fahrenheit . On 10/30/18 at 11:04 AM, the surveyor observed Employee Indentifier EI #4, the cook, remove the Brussels sprouts from the warmer, stating, I forgot my Brussels spouts, and put them on the tray line and starting serving them without taking the temperature. On 10/30/18 at 2:47 PM, an interview was conducted with EI #4, the cook. EI #4 was asked, who was responsible for checking the temperatures on the tray line. EI #4 replied, she was. EI #4 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2018-11-01 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
    Honor 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

    Based on observation, interview, record review and review of a facility policy Maintaining/ Promoting Resident Dignity and Respect, the facility failed to ensure Resident Identifier (RI) #19 was not on the porch, in the facility halls and in the dining area with the suprapubic catheter, drain tubing and catheter drain bag visible to residents and visitors. This was observed on 10/30/18 and 10/31/18 and affected three unsampled residents who preferred the catheter tubing and bag not be exposed. Findings Include: A review of facility policy titled, Maintaining/ Promoting Resident Dignity and Respect with a revised date of 3/2017 revealed: Policy Statement . Residents are appropriately covered by clothing/covers to avoid inappropriate exposure . RI #19 was admitted to the facility 11/7/17 with a diagnosis of Retention of Urine. On 10/30/18 at 4:10 PM, RI #19 was observed on the front porch of the facility with other residents smoking. RI #19 finished smoking and walked back in the facility. While RI #19 was on the porch the surveyor observed RI #19's catheter, catheter tubing to the…

    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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2018-11-01 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    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, interview, record review and review of a facility policy titled, Resident Smoking, the facility failed to ensure a safe smoking assessment was completed for Resident Identifier (RI) #145 in a timely manner. Findings Include: A review of a facility policy titled, Resident Smoking, with a revised date of 7/2/18 revealed: .Policy: .6. All residents will be asked about tobacco use during the admission process, during each quarterly or comprehensive MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment process. 7. Residents who smoke will be further assessed, using the Resident Safe Smoking Assessment, . RI #145 was admitted to the facility 1/8/18 with a diagnosis of Nicotine dependence. A review of RI #145's care plan dated 1/15/18 revealed, .is a smoker . Reassess residents' safety with smoking as indicated. A review of RI #145's Safe Smoking Assessment form, dated 10/11/18, revealed the form was completed. A form on the electronic health record dated 6/14/18 was reviewed which revealed a blank form, no date and…

    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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“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.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • 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.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

$85,230 in federal fines across 1 penalty. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.

  • $85,230 — penalty dated 2026-01-18
  • Medicare payment denial — starting 2026-02-17 for 3 days

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
STINSON, BARBARAIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 12/18/2013
BRYARS JR, AIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2010
FLEMING JR, Z IIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2013
MITCHELL, BEVERLYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2009
MIXSON, BILLYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2012
SESSIONS, KARYNIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2012
WEATHERFORD, JIMIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2011
WILSON, CLEMMIEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2013

The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

$16.3M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+3.4%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 70%Medicare 3%Other / private 28%

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

$300per resident / day
operating cost
$9,117per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$311per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2024). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in AL

Paying with Medicaid

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.

Typical monthly cost in Alabama
$8,334/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$8,787/mo
Nursing home (private)
$4,425/mo
Assisted living

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 015320. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-18, 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.

What to do next