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

Crowne Health Care Of Eufaula

430 Rivers Avenue, Eufaula, AL 36027 · For profit - Corporation · 180 certified beds · (334) 687-6627 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Flagged for abuseResident-funds citation (F0567)1 actual-harm citation$42,884 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)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (34% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
Worth asking about
  • CMS has flagged it for abuse
  • it has abuse, neglect, or exploitation citations (F0600, F0602) — most recent Dec 2024
  • 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
  • it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0567)
  • it has 1 actual-harm citation
  • the CMS record shows $42,884 in federal fines (most recent 2024-09-20)
  • its payroll-based staffing score sits well above its independent inspection score
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
  • its last standard health inspection was over 3 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.

2/5
CMS overall
2 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 2 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 4 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 3 of 5

Worth a closer look. This home's staffing rating runs 2 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
Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
138 E Broad St · (334) 687-2545 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
130 S Eufaula Ave · (334) 687-7144 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
120 Broad St
Park
333 E Broad St · (334) 687-1236 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
240 Laney St · (334) 687-4406

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 3 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 rating3★
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 increased8.6%12.0%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight4.0%5.4%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder2.1%1.0%0.9%worse
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection5.0%2.4%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms1.2%1.4%6.5%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.8%0.6%0.1%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury4.6%3.3%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened8.3%12.1%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication14.2%24.5%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine98.7%94.8%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers4.8%5.4%4.7%typical
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control6.2%12.8%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table11.6%21.2%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.9%2.0%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine93.1%80.3%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission35.1%24.8%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit4.1%11.3%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.311.961.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days3.021.701.80worse

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.

49.0% 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 71 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

49.0%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
9.7%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
41.1%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.20U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.10hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.06hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.03hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 41.1% 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 56 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 0.20 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 22% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 10% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. 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 SNF49.0%CMS range 35.4–62.051.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF9.7%CMS range 6.6–13.910.7%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 discharge41.1%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 discharge39.3%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 discharge33.9%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 identified94.2%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 setting97.7%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 stay2.3%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 worsened3.5%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 hospitalization6.7%CMS range 3.5–12.37.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.871.02Oct 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

0.63
RN hours/ resident / day
0.81
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.12
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.56
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.34
RN hoursweekends
34.4%
Total nursing turnover
28.6%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 180 beds and averages 161.0 residents a day — about 89% occupied, or roughly 19 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. 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 3.56 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.63 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.12 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 2.89 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.84 on weekdays — 25% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.75 to 0.34 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 34% is below 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

2
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2022-11-10)
2
at the previous standard inspection (2021-07-09)

Deficiencies are unchanged from the previous inspection. 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 3 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.

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.

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

  • Actual harm · Gcited before2024-09-20 · 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, residents record reviews, review of a facility policy titled Abuse Policy, review of Facility Reported Incidents (FRI), and review of the facility's investigative files, the facility failed to protect residents' right to be free from abuse perpetrated by other residents. 1) On 04/12/2024 Resident Identifier (RI) #15 was physically abused when RI #14 hit him/her with a broom handle causing bruising to his/her wrist and legs. 2) On 04/25/2024 RI #1 was physically abused when he/she was slapped in the face by RI #17. 3) On 07/14/2024 RI #1 was physically abused when RI #4 hit him/her in the forehead. 4) On 08/30/2024 RI #4 was physically abused when RI #9 slapped him/her in the face. This deficiency was cited as a result of the investigation of FRI/complaint/report numbers AL00047553, AL00047690, AL00048340, and AL00048715 and affected RI #1, RI #4, and RI #15, three of 12 residents sampled for abuse concerns. Findings include: A facility policy titled Abuse Policy dated October 2022, revealed…

    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 · Dcited before2024-12-19 · 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, residents record review, review of a facility policy titled ABUSE POLICY, review of Facility Reported Incidents (FRI), and review of the facility's investigative files, the facility failed to ensure residents in the facility were free from abuse perpetrated by employees of the facility and other facility residents. Specifically, 1) On 09/20/2024 Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #4, who was assigned to provide care for Resident Identifier (RI) #10, verbally and mentally abused RI #10 when other facility staff witnessed CNA #4 tell RI #10 not to shit in his/her brief or she would leave his/her big ass to sit in it. This deficiency was cited as the result of the investigation of complaint/report number AL00049007. 2) On 11/04/2024 RI #10 was verbally abused by RI #13, a resident with a history of verbally aggressive behaviors, when RI #13 asked RI #10 if he/she could play with RI #10's titties. The facility failed to ensure RI #13 had a plan of care to address the level of supervision RI #13…

    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 plan of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-12-19 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, review of a facility policy titled, ABUSE POLICY, review of the facility's investigative file and review of a Facility Reported Incident (FRI) received by the State Agency, the facility failed to ensure an allegation of verbal abuse involving Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #4 and Resident Identifier (RI) #10 was reported to the Administrator (ADM) immediately and within two hours of the incident after the incident occurred on 09/20/2024. This deficient practiced affected one of 11 FRIs reviewed, and one of 18 residents sampled for abuse. This deficiency was cited as a result of the investigation of complaint/report number AL00049007. Findings include: Review of a facility policy titled, ABUSE POLICY, dated 12/2024, revealed the following: . Procedure for Documentation and Investigation of Resident Abuse . 4. Notify . Administrator . immediately . RI #10 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The Alabama Department of Public Health Online Incident Reporting System form, submitted 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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-20 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on resident record reviews, interviews, review of facility investigative files, and a facility policy titled Abuse Prevention Policy, the facility failed to report allegations of abuse within two hours to the State Agency. 1) On 07/30/2024 at 6:00 PM Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #17 heard a slap in Resident Identifier (RI) #1 and RI #3's room and the alleged physical abuse was not reported to the State Agency until 07/30/2024 at 8:30 PM, two and a half hours later. 2) On 08/20/2024 at 9:45 PM RI #1 was found to have injuries as a result of a tussle with roommate (RI #2). The incident of alleged physical abuse was reported to the State Agency the next morning on 08/21/2024 at 10:42 AM, over 12 hours later. 3) On 09/13/2024 at 3:00 PM RI #20 alleged physical abuse of being hit in the back by RI #1. The allegation of abuse was not reported to the State Agency until 09/18/2024, five days later. This deficient practice was cited a result of the investigation of complaint/report numbers AL00048506 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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has plan of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2022-11-10 · tag F0567 — failed to protect residents' money held by the home — widespread
    Honor the resident's right to manage his or her financial affairs.
    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, record reviews, review of a facility document titled, Maintaining Patient Trust Receipts, review of a facility document titled, Resident Trust Audit, and review of two unnamed facility documents, the facility failed to ensure residents' trust accounts were safeguarded when staff failed to follow facility procedure for issuing money from Resident Trust Accounts. This affected 66 of 73 residents sampled for review of personal funds including Resident Identifier (RI) #4, RI #6, RI #11, RI #13, RI #14, RI #15, RI #17, RI #19, RI #21, RI #23, RI #25, RI #28, RI #29, RI #31, RI #34, RI #40, RI #41, RI #42, RI #48, RI #49, RI #54, RI #55, RI #57, RI #60, RI #62, RI #66, RI #67, RI #68, RI #71, RI #74, RI #83, RI #84, RI #85, RI #86, RI #87, RI #89, RI #95, RI #101, RI #102, RI #105, RI #113, RI #114, RI #115, RI #119, RI #122, RI #132, RI #139, RI #142, RI #154, RI #208, RI #209, RI #210, RI #211, RI #213, RI #215, RI #218, RI #219, RI #220, RI #221, RI #222, RI #223, RI #224, RI #225, RI #260, RI…

    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 · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · E2022-11-10 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — pattern
    Protect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
    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, record review, facility's investigation, and a review of facility's policy titled, Abuse Policy, the facility failed to protect resident's funds from misappropriation when Employee Identifier (EI) #2 former Business Officer Manager stole $700 from Residents Trust Accounts. This deficient practice affected RI (Resident Identifier) #3, #15, #41, #48, #57 #62, #74, #83, #101, #103, #122, #132, #138, #139 and #142; fifteen of 73 sampled residents reviewed for misappropriation of residents' funds. Findings include: 1) RI #3 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. RI #3 's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, dated 10/28/2022, indicated he/she had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 12 out of 15 which indicated the resident was cognitively intact. 2) RI #15 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. RI #15 's yearly MDS, dated [DATE], indicated he/she had a BIMS score of 12 out of 15 which indicated the resident was cognitively…

    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 · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · D2021-07-09 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    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 and record review the facility failed to provide Activities of Daily Living (ADL) assistance according to the resident's bathing preference for one of four residents sampled for ADLs, Resident #3. Findings included: Resident Identifier (RI) #3 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Anemia, Bursitis of left shoulder, Hypertension, Splenomegaly, Ovarian Cyst, and Cataract. Review of RI #3's Clinical Record since 3/1/21 revealed no documentation of resident refusals of care. Review of RI #3's Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] recorded the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15/15, which indicated intact cognition. The MDS recorded the resident had no delirium, psychosis or negative behaviors and a mood severity score of zero (0). The MDS recorded the resident required physical help in part of the bathing activity. Review of the RI #3's Care Plan revealed a Smart Chart task list which states, *FYI…

    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 · Dcited before2021-07-09 · 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

    Based on observation, interview and policy review the facility staff failed to implement the Infection Control Policy designed to prevent transmission of infections during meal service in the dining room of the Memory Care Unit. This failure could result in cross-contamination between residents during meal service and had the potential to affect residents receiving meals on the Memory Care Unit. Findings include: Review of the facility Surveillance and Education Policy revised 3/17 reflected the Infection Control Nurse (ICRN) reviews findings relevant to infection control issues including .proper hand hygiene and topics of infection control training include .hand hygiene. Review of the facility's Hand Hygiene Policy and Procedure revised 4/2020 reflected perform hand hygiene .assisting a resident with meals, between resident contacts, after handling soiled equipment .and when otherwise indicated to avoid transfer of microorganisms to other residents or environments. Observation of meal service in the Memory Care dining room on 7/7/21 revealed Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs) #6,…

    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 · F2019-05-02 · 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 made in the kitchen on 04/29/19 and 05/01/19, interviews with facility staff and a review of the facility's Food Storage and Personal Food Storage policies and a facility document titled Resource: Food Safety for Your Loved One, dietary staff failed to consistently label frozen meat and vegetables removed from their original packaging with an open and use by date. In addition, Nursing staff failed to label residents' food items brought in by family members and stored at each of the three nursing stations, with date of storage and use-by date to ensure timely disposal. This had the potential to affect all 159 residents for whom meals were prepared and served, as well as residents' refrigerated storage on 3 of 3 nursing stations. Findings Included: 1) DIETARY FOOD STORAGE The facility's Food Storage policy (dated 2013) specifies the following: . Procedure: . 15. Frozen Foods: .c. All foods should be covered, labeled and dated. All foods will be checked to assure that foods will be consumed by their safe use by dates or discarded. On 04/29/19 at 3:49 PM, 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-05-02 · tag F0640 — isolated
    Encode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interviews, Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments and a review of CMS's (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid) RAI (Resident Assessment Instrument) Version 3.0 Manual, the facility failed to ensure RI #4's Significant Change (SC) MDS and RI #7's Annual MDS assessments were submitted timely. This had the potential to affect 2 of 4 residents whose assessments were reviewed for being over 120 days late. Findings Include: A review of CMS's RAI Version 3.0 Chapter 5: Submission and Correction of the MDS Assessments . page 5-3 specifies, the assessment must be submitted within 14 days of the MDS Completion Date A review of RI #4's 2/25/2019 Annual MDS, section VO200C was signed and dated 3/18/19. The document should have been submitted by 4/1/19. A review of RI #7's 2/25/2019 SC MDS section VO200C was signed and dated 3/18/2019. The MDS should have been submitted by 4/1/2019. On 5/02/2019 at 8:39 a.m., the surveyor reviewed four residents' assessments that were identified by CMS as 120 days over-due. On 5/02/2019 at 9:22 a.m., an interview was conducted with Registered Nurse (RN), EI…

    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 Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-05-02 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
    Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
    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, Policy and Procedures for Aseptic Technique with Dressing Changes, the facility failed to ensure the licensed staff did not use the same gloves to clean a wound for Resident Identifier (RI) #106, then place the clean treatment and outer covering. This affected one of one resident observed for wound care. 1. A review of a facility policy titled Policy and Procedure for Aseptic Technique with Dressing Changes with a date of 7/18/05 revealed: . The goals for treating a wound are to prevent cross contamination and/or infection of an open area and to prevent additional trauma to area. RI #106 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of Pressure ulcer of sacral region, stage 2. A review of RI #106's April 2019 Physician Orders revealed . 2/20/19 .Cleanse Unstageable Pressure Wound To Sacrum With Normal Saline Pat Dry . Apply Medihoney Calcium Alginate To Wound Bed Every Day Cover With . Adhesive. On 4/30/19 at 9:46…

    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 · D2019-05-02 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    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, and a review of facility's policy titled, INFECTION CONTROL OXYGEN EQUIPMENT, the facility failed to ensure oxygen tubing and the humidifier bottle were replaced and dated appropriately for Resident Identifier(RI) #313. This affected 1 of 3 residents observed for oxygen therapy. Findings Include: A review of a facility policy titled, INFECTION CONTROL OXYGEN EQUIPMENT with a revised date of 8/2012, revealed: . Procedures . 4. Humidifiers are to be replaced weekly and dated. 5. Oxygen tubing, mask, and cannula's are to be replaced weekly and dated. RI #313 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of Hypoxemia and dependence of supplemental oxygen. A Physician orders, dated 04/18/19, revealed the order for oxygen (O2) at 2 liters per minute per nasal cannula as needed for shortness of breath and low O2 saturations. On 04/29/19 at 3:18 PM, the surveyor observed RI #313 resting in bed, wearing oxygen. No dates were observed on either the oxygen tubing or the humidifier…

    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 · D2019-05-02 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    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 review of facility a policy titled, Medication Administration - General Guidelines, the facility failed to ensure that licensed staff did not leave a medication cart unlocked and unattended while administering medications to Resident Identifier (RI) #2. This affected one of five nurses observed for medication pass. Findings Include: A review of the facility policy titled, Medication Administration - General Guidelines with a date of 01/12 revealed: .Procedures . 11. During administration of medications, the medication cart is kept closed and locked when out of sight of the medication nurse. RI #2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and re-admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses of: Encounter for attention to gastrostomy and Dementia in other diseases classified elsewhere. On 4/30/19 at 5:00 PM, Employee Identifier (EI) #5 a Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) was observed preparing medication for RI #2. EI #5 prepared the following medications: Carafate, Ceftin, and Maxitrol eye…

    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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2019-05-02 · 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, interview, record review and review of a facility policy titled, Medication Administration Procedures Eye Drops the facility failed to ensure: 1. licensed staff washed her hands before administering eye drops for RI #122 and 2. licensed staff did not handle tablet medication with her bare hands, then touch the inside of a crush medication bag while preparing medication for RI #2. This affected one of one resident observed for eye drop medication and one of one resident observed for medication administered by tube. Findings Include: 1. A review of a facility policy titled, Medication Administration Procedures Eye Drops, with a date of 1/12 revealed: .Procedures .3. Wash your hand with soap and water . 9. Instruct the resident to look upward and place one drop .14. Wash your hands with soap and water . RI #122 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of Unspecified Glaucoma. A review of RI #122's April 2019 Physician Orders revealed: . 3/06/19 Dorzolamide .Eye Drops Instill 1…

    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

“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

$42,884 in federal fines across 1 penalty. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.

  • $42,884 — penalty dated 2024-09-20
  • Medicare payment denial — starting 2024-10-19 for 96 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.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to CROWNE HEALTH CARE — 18 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 2 of 54.2-2.2 vs chain
Health inspection 2 of 53.8-1.8 vs chain
Staffing 4 of 54.6-0.6 vs chain
Quality measures 3 of 52.8+0.2 vs chain
The other 17 homes this chain runs (chain average 4.2★, per CMS)

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
CROWNE OPERATIONS, INCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 11/01/2003
JENNIFER JONES MCINNISH FAMILY DYNASTY TRUST #1Organization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 12/31/2016
RICHARD BRYAN JONES FAMILY DYNASTY TRUST #1Organization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 12/31/2016
RAILEY, LINDAIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 12/10/2009
DUNNAM, NOELIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 06/11/2015
JONES, RICHARDIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 06/11/2015
MANNING, MARCUSIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 06/11/2015
WILDER, JOHNIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 12/08/2003
CROWNE MANAGEMENT, LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 01/11/2010

CMS files one row per role, so the 11 rows in the source record cover these 9 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

4 organizational owners 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.

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.

$17.3M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+5.1%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.1M
Related-party expense7% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 84%Medicare 4%Other / private 12%

About 84% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $1.1M paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

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

$280per resident / day
operating cost
$8,498per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$294per 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 015199. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2022-11-10, 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