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

Greenway Health and Rehabilitation Center, LLC

13750 Highway 90 West, Grand Bay, AL 36541 · For profit - Corporation · 92 certified beds · (251) 865-6443 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse/neglect citations on record (F0600, F0602, F0609, F0610) — most recent Jun 2025Behavioral-health or dementia-care citation at the harm level (F0740)7 immediate-jeopardy citations$18,348 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
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • it has abuse, neglect, or exploitation citations (F0600, F0602, F0609, F0610) — most recent Jun 2025
  • inspectors cited 7 immediate-jeopardy problems — the most serious level
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (21) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • the CMS record shows $18,348 in federal fines (most recent 2023-09-11)
  • its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
  • nursing-staff turnover (72%) runs well above the national median (45%)
  • 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.

1/5
CMS overall
1 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 1 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 3 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Worth a closer look. This home's staffing and quality-measure ratings run 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself, and staffing on its payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
5580 Inn Rd · (251) 666-8232 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
10067 Grand Bay Wilmer Rd S · (251) 865-5555 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
10120 Grand Bay Wilmer Rd S · (251) 865-6330 · Call to confirm hours
Park
10331 Potter Tract Rd · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
12270 Mt Pisgah Church Rd · (251) 865-4652

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 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 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 increased2.8%12.0%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight3.6%5.4%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%1.0%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%2.4%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms2.1%1.4%6.5%worse 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 injury3.2%3.3%3.3%typical
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened4.6%12.1%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication18.2%24.5%18.9%typical
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine73.2%94.8%95.3%worse
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers4.0%5.4%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control20.5%12.8%21.2%typical
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table28.9%21.2%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.6%2.0%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine50.8%80.3%79.4%worse
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission32.7%24.8%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit11.7%11.3%12.0%typical

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.

0.29U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.13hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.07hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.09hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.29 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 45% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 5% 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 SNFnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNFnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final 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 worsened0.0%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 hospitalizationnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFsnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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

0.68
RN hours/ resident / day
0.98
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.98
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.64
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.28
RN hoursweekends
72.1%
Total nursing turnover
86.7%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 92 beds and averages 71.1 residents a day — about 77% occupied, or roughly 21 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.64 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.68 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.98 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 3.17 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.83 on weekdays — 17% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.84 to 0.28 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 72% is well above 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 (2023-08-17)
3
at the previous standard inspection (2022-07-13)

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.

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.

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

  • Immediate jeopardy · L2025-04-15 · tag F0835 — failed to run the facility competently — widespread
    Administer the facility in a manner that enables it to use its resources effectively and efficiently.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interviews, record review, review of the Job Description of the Administrator (ADM) and review of the facility's Abuse Policy, the facility's Administrator failed to identify and report sexual abuse in a timely manner to the State Agency. The ADM failed to thoroughly investigate an occurrence of sexual abuse to determine causal factors and develop an action plan for prevention of sexual abuse in the facility. On 01/13/2025 at approximately 2:00 AM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #13 observed Resident Identifier (RI) #20 sitting on RI #44's bed next to RI #44 who had severely impaired cognition and did not have the capacity to consent to the situation. RI #20 was nude from the waist down and was looking at RI #44 and caressing RI #44's hip and thigh. It was determined the facility's non-compliance with one or more requirements of participation had caused, or was likely to cause, serious injury, harm, impairment, or serious psychosocial harm to residents. The Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) was related to State Operations Manual, Appendix PP, 483.70 Administration. On 04/11/2025 at…

    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
  • Immediate jeopardy · L2025-04-15 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — widespread
    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 interviews, record review, review of facility policies titled Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation and Quality Assessment and Assurance Committee, the facility's Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) committee, failed to review all allegations of abuse and injuries of unknown origin to ensure thorough investigations were conducted, investigations were conducted per facility policy, residents were protected, and reporting was timely. The Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA or QAPI) committee did not review incidents of abuse that occurred to ensure the Abuse Policy was fully implemented for all allegations of abuse including staff identifying, stopping (protecting the resident from further abuse), and reporting abuse. The QAA committee did not review the incidents to ensure the allegations were thoroughly investigated to ensure the appropriate corrective actions were taken to prevent further abuse. Specifically, the QAA did not complete thorough review of the following allegations: 01/13/2025 RI #44 was sexually abused by RI #20; 05/27/2024 RI #3 had a fracture…

    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
  • Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2025-04-15 · 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 record reviews, review of a facility policy titled Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation, review of Facility Reported Incidents (FRIs) received by the State Agency, and review of the facility's investigative files, the facility failed to protect the residents' right to be free from sexual, physical, and verbal abuse perpetrated by staff and residents. 1.) On 01/13/2025 at approximately 2:00 AM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #13 observed Resident Identifier (RI) #44's call light was on. The Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) assigned to care for RI #44, CNA #23, was on her lunch break at that time and the CNA assigned to care for RI #20, CNA #12, was not permitted to enter RI #44's room. LPN #13 administered medications to another resident and then responded to the call light. Upon entering the room, LPN #13 witnessed RI #20 sitting on RI #44's bed next to RI #44 who had severely impaired cognition and did not have the capacity to consent to the situation. RI #20 was nude from the waist…

    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 · J2025-04-15 · 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, resident record reviews, review of a facility policy titled Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation, review of Facility Reported Incidents (FRIs) received by the State Agency, and review of the facility's investigative files, the facility failed to ensure an allegation of sexual abuse was reported to the State Agency within two hours. Specifically, on 01/13/2025 around 2:00 AM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #13 called the Administrator/Abuse Coordinator (ADM) and reported RI #20 had been witnessed nude from the waist down in RI #44's room, sitting on Resident Identifier (RI) #44's bed next to RI #44 caressing RI #44's hip and thigh. The ADM failed report the allegation of sexual abuse to the State Agency until three days later on 01/16/2025. It was determined the facility's noncompliance with one or more requirements of participation had caused, or was likely to cause, serious injury, harm, impairment, or death to residents. The Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) was cited in reference to 483.12 Freedom from…

    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 · J2025-04-15 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
    Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
    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, and review of a facility policy titled Abuse Neglect and Exploitation the facility failed to conduct a thorough investigation to ensure appropriate corrective actions were taken to prevent recurrence following an allegation of sexual abuse that occurred on 01/13/2025, involving Resident Identifier (RI) #20 and RI #44. On 01/13/2025 at approximately 2:00 AM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #13 responded to a call light from RI #44's room and found RI #20 naked from the waist down, seated on RI #44's bed caressing RI #44's hip and thigh. The facility failed to ensure the investigation included and focused on whether abuse had occurred, the extent, and cause. The facility's investigation did not include when RI #20 entered RI #44's room, the duration of RI #20's presence in the room, details regarding what LPN #13 had witnessed, and RI #20's history of known behaviors of masturbation, watching others undress, and wandering. Additionally, the facility failed to determine when 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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Immediate jeopardy · J2025-04-15 · tag F0740 — failed to provide behavioral / mental-health care — isolated
    Ensure each resident must receive and the facility must provide necessary behavioral health care and services.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, resident record review, and review of a facility policy titled Behavioral Health Care Services, the facility failed to ensure residents with behaviors were managed and addressed to prevent and protect other residents from being abused, and to ensure other residents' safety and privacy was protected from residents with combative, aggressive, wandering, and sexual behaviors. 1.) Specifically, on 01/13/2025 during the night, at approximately 2:00 AM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #13 found Resident Identifier (RI) #20 in another resident's room, sitting on RI #44's bed, without clothing from the waist down, and caressing RI #44's hip and thigh. Facility staff had knowledge of resident masturbating, family members witnessed RI #20 masturbating, and a Behavioral Health (BH) note dated 01/14/2025 documented family had reported resident would masturbate in front of others. The facility failed to communicate these behaviors to ensure interventions were developed and implemented to ensure RI #20 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Immediate jeopardy · K2023-08-17 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — pattern
    Ensure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interviews, record reviews, document review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents who received mechanically altered diets were provided a meal consistent with their prescribed diet and of the appropriate texture and form to meet their individual needs. Further, the facility failed to ensure policies addressing the criteria for foods consistent with a mechanical soft diet were developed, implemented, and available to staff. Staff were not knowledgeable on what foods were acceptable for residents with orders for a mechanical soft diet. This failure affected 23 residents with orders for mechanical soft diets. Specifically, on 08/14/2023, the menu indicated the lunch meal for residents with mechanical soft diet orders would consist of ground pork, and the dinner meal would consist of a ground chicken salad plate. Instead, the facility prepared and served residents with orders for mechanical soft diets cubed pork tips cut into one (1) to one and one-half (1 1/2) inch cubes for lunch and a salad containing lettuce, dried croutons, and fried onion…

    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 · Dcited before2025-06-13 · 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, Neglect and Exploitation, review of a Facility Reported Incident (FRI), and review of the facility's investigative file, the facility failed to ensure Resident Identifier (RI) #33 and RI #42 did not physically abuse each other. Specifically, On 04/08/2025 staff failed to provide supervision and intervene when RI #33 was upset and yelling out at RI #42. As RI #42 passed by RI #33, RI #33 hit RI #42, which resulted in RI #42 hitting RI #33 back. According to RI #33's plan of care when RI #33 had acute behaviors staff should intervene promptly to reduce the risk of escalation. This deficiency was cited as the result of the investigation of complaint/report number AL00051008. Findings Include: Review of an undated facility's policy titled, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation, revealed the following: Policy: It is the policy of this facility to provide protections for the health, welfare and rights of each resident by developing 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 · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-04-15 · 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 review of facility policies titled,OnTray Dietary Policies and Procedures, Use-By Guideline Handout, Ice Machine: Bin Type and Scoop, Hood, Vents & Filter the facility failed to ensure: 1) food items in the freezer were labeled; 2) the ice machine was cleaned and; 3) the stove hood bulbs and stove hood was free of a a grease like substance. This had the potential to affect 63 of 63 residents who received meals from the kitchen. Findings including: A review of a facility's policy titled, Use-By Guidelines Handout with no date revealed: The following guide can be used to determine a use-by date when labeling opened or unopened food that must be used within a certain time frame. Foods with a manufacturer's use-by date should still require an opened-on date once the item is opened. On 04/02/2025 at 8:33 AM, the surveyor and the Dietary Director (DD) #27 toured the kitchen. The surveyor and the DD observed diced potatoes frozen in a large bag, six hamburger patties in a large bag, chicken thighs in a large bag, about sixty potatoes tarts in a large…

    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 · F2025-04-15 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — widespread
    Dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interviews and review of a facility policy titled OnTray Dietary Policies and Procedure, the facility failed to ensure the dumpster doors were closed on dumpsters one and two. This had the potential to affect 65 of 65 residents who reside at the facility. Findings include: A review of an undated facility policy titled, OnTray Dietary Policies and Procedure, revealed: Trash Disposal . Purpose: To prevent the spread of infection and deter pests and rodents. 2. The dietary department should ensure the dumpster lids are closed when disposing of trash . On 04/02/2025 at 9:09 AM, the surveyor toured the dumpster area with the Dietary Director (DD) #27. The dumpster door on one and two dumpsters were opened on the side. The opened dumpster doors were facing each other. On 04/04/2025 at 9:45 AM the DD said, she saw the dumpster and she stated the two dumpster doors facing each other were opened. The DD stated, staff did not close them. The DD stated, all staff in the building were responsible for keeping the dumpster doors closed to keep out rodents, pests, 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2025-04-15 · tag F0851 — widespread
    Electronically submit to CMS complete and accurate direct care staffing information, based on payroll and other verifiable and auditable data.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review, interview and Payroll Based Journal (PBJ) Report, the facility failed to report accurate staff data from Fiscal Year (FY) Quarter 1 (October 1 to December 31) to the Center of Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). This affected one quarter of data reviewed during the survey and had the potential to affect all 65 residents in the facility. Findings Include: The PBJ report generated for the quarter October 1-December 21, 2023, documented: . This Staffing Data Report identifies areas of concern that will be triggered . Excessively Low Weekend Staffing . Triggered . Submitted Weekend Staffing data is excessively low . On 04/08/2025 at 4:14 PM a telephone interview was conducted with the Director of Informatic (DI). The DI stated she was responsible for submitting the PBJ to CMS. She sated the previous ownership submitted the PBJ for the first part of the quarter and she submitted part of the PBJ for 11/16/2024 to 12/31/2024. When asked why the facility triggered for excessively low weekend staff, she stated because the facility's time and attendance system…

    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 · E2025-04-15 · 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, the facility's investigative file, a review of information from the Alabama Department of Public Health's (ADPH) Online Reporting System, the facility policies titled ABUSE POLICY/REPORTING ABUSE, and Medication Administration the facility failed to ensure Resident Identifier (RI) #324 and RI #329 were free from misappropriation of property when the resident's controlled substances were unable to be accounted for after Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #31's shift from 6:00 PM on 07/14/2024 to 6:00 AM on 07/15/2024. Specifically, LPN #31 signed RI #324's Controlled Drug Record for Lorazepam indicating that she removed a tablet. RI #324's Medication Administration Record (MAR or EMAR) revealed that the medication was not administered. During medication count back of LPN #31's cart, one of RI #329's Gabapentin was missing and was not documented as administered on RI #329's MAR. This deficient practice affected Resident Identified (RI) #324 and RI #329, two of 19 residents reviewed…

    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 · E2025-04-15 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — pattern
    Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
    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 record review, interviews, the Alabama Department of Public Health Online Incident Reporting System, review of a facility investigative file, and review of a facility policies titled ERRORS IN CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE COUNTS / DISCREPANCIES and Medication Administration the facility failed to ensure Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #31 followed standard of practice when she failed to document the administration of controlled medications during the 6:00 PM (07/14/2024) to 6:00 AM (07/15/2024) shift per facility's policy and standards of practice. Specifically, LPN #31 failed to document the removal of controlled medications on the residents' Controlled Drug Records when she documented the medications as administered on the Electronic Medication Administration Record (EMAR or MAR). The deficient practice affected Resident Identifiers (RI) # 6, RI #20, RI #327, RI #328, RI #319. Further, LPN #31 failed to administer RI #319's Norco on 07/15/2024 at 1:00 AM, RI #22's Gabapentin on 07/14/2024 at 8:00 PM, and 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 Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-04-15 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, record review and review of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS Center) Long-Term Care Resident Instrument 3.0 Manual, the facility failed to ensure Resident Identifier (RI) #53's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] was coded accurately to reflect RI #53 had a Preadmission screening and Resident Review (PASRR) Level II. This deficient practice affected one of 20 sampled residents whose MDS was reviewed. Findings include: Review of Center for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) Long- Term Care Resident Instrument 3.0 Manual, dated October 2024, revealed the following: A 1500 Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) . Code 1. Yes: if PASRR Level II screening determined that the resident has a serious mental illness and/or ID/DD or related condition. RI #53 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses to include Depression, Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Disturbances of Emotions and Conduct, and Psychotic Disorder with Delusions due to known Physiological Condition…

    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 · D2023-10-06 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, record review and review of facility policies titled, DAILY CATHETER CARE MALE/FEMALE and FEEDING RESIDENTS, the facility failed to ensure: 1) Resident Identifier (RI) #4's Foley GU (Genitourinary) bag was in a dignity bag on 10/03/2023 when out of his/her room; and 2) staff did not stand while feeding RI #9 the lunch and dinner meals on 10/03/2023. These deficient practices affected RI #4, one of three residents, sampled with GU bags; and RI #9, one of two sampled residents requiring assistance with meals. Findings include: 1) A facility policy titled, DAILY CATHETER CARE MALE/FEMALE, dated 04/2023, revealed the following: . When policy applies At all times . • Cover catheter bag with dignity bag at all times . RI #4 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of Retention of Urine. RI #4's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 09/18/2023, revealed RI #4 had an indwelling catheter during this assessment period. 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2022-07-13 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and review of policies titled, FOOD STORAGE and Food Storage from Visitors or Family the facility failed to ensure: 1. opened, stored food items in the kitchen were labeled appropriately during the initial kitchen observation on 7/10/2022. This had the potential to affect all 68 residents that receive meals from the kitchen. 2. the unit refrigerators were not found with unlabeled food items on 7/12/2022. This had the potential to affect all 71 residents residing at the facility who could have had food items stored in the unit refrigerators. Findings include: Review of an undated facility policy titled, FOOD STORAGE revealed, Policy Statement . PROCEDURES . 15. a. All opened, refrigerated items should possess an opened date and used by date. Review of a facility policy titled, Food Storage from Visitors or Family with a last review date of 5/2022 revealed, . PROCEDURE When food is brought in from outside for a resident the following will occur: Food is taken by the front desk…

    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 · D2022-07-13 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    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, record reviews and review of facility policies titled, Activities of Daily Living and Care Plan Initiation, the facility failed to ensure staff followed the plan of care regarding assistance with Activities of Daily Living (ADL) care for (Resident Identifier) RI #7 and RI #30. This had the potential to affect RI #7 and RI #30, two of eighteen residents whose care plans were reviewed. Findings include: 1. A review of a facility policy titled, Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) with a last review date of 5/2022, revealed, Who should follow the policy All Staff When policy applies At all times . Provide care and offer assistance to resident during ADLs . Follow the care plan designed for each resident . ADLS include but not limited to the following types of care: . Body care . RI #7 was readmitted to the facility 4/12/2022. Review of RI #7's significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed RI #7 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) Score of five…

    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 · D2022-07-13 · 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 observations, interviews and review of facility policies titled, Activities of Daily Living, TO ASSURE QUALITY RESIDENT CARE AND CONTINUITY OF RESIDENT CARE and Grooming Facial Hair for Male and Female Residents, the facility failed to ensure Activities of Daily Living (ADL) assistance was provided to Resident Identifier (RI) #7 and RI #30, two of two residents sampled for the provision of ADL care. Findings include: A review of a facility policy titled, TO ASSURE QUALITY RESIDENT CARE AND CONTINUITY OF RESIDENT CARE, with a last review date of 5/2022 revealed, Who should follow the policy All Staff When policy applies At all times . PROVIDE RESIDENT CARE ASSIGNMENTS . PERSONAL CARE . SHAVING . A review of a facility policy titled, Grooming Facial Hair for Male and Female Residents, last updated 4/2022, revealed, Who should follow the policy All Staff When policy applies At all times . PROCEDURE Grooming of facial hair for a male or female resident will be as follows: . Resident's facial hair will be…

    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 · D2021-06-09 · tag F0623 — isolated
    Provide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and review of Resident Identifier (RI) #9's medical record, the facility failed to ensure the resident, their representative and the Office of the State Long-Term Care (LTC) Ombudsman received written notification of RI #9's transfer/discharge to a local hospital. This deficient practice affected RI #9; one of two sampled residents reviewed for hospitalization. Findings include: RI #9 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. According to RI #9's medical record, the resident was transferred/discharged to a local hospital on [DATE], 11/20/2020, 12/10/2020, 1/25/2021, 4/24/2021, 5/4/2021, and 5/28/2021. There was no documentation found within the resident's medical record of a written notification to the resident, the resident's representative, or the Office of the State LTC Ombudsman regarding either transfer/discharge to the local hospital for RI #9. On 6/9/2021 at 5:53 PM, an interview was conducted with Employee Identifier (EI) #1, the Administrator and EI #2, the Social Service Director. Both…

    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 · D2021-06-09 · tag F0625 — isolated
    Notify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
    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 interview and review of Resident Identifier (RI) #9's medical record, the facility failed to issue a bed-hold notice to the resident and/or their representative when RI #9 was transferred to a local hospital. This deficient practice affected RI #9; one of two sampled residents reviewed for hospitalization. Findings include: Review of the facility admission Packet revealed a section titled Transfer and Discharge that stated We will not transfer a resident to a hospital or allow a resident to go on therapeutic leave without first providing written information to that resident and a family member or legal representative specifying the applicable bed hold policy. Bed hold policy refers to the period of time (if any) during which the resident is permitted to return and resume residence in the facility after hospitalization or therapeutic leave. RI #9 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. According to RI #9's medical record, the resident was transferred to a local hospital on [DATE], 11/20/2020, 12/10/2020,…

    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 · D2021-06-09 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolated
    Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
    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, interview and review of Resident Identifier (RI) #15's medical record, the facility failed to provide feeding assistance to RI #15, a resident assessed as being totally dependent on staff for eating. This deficient practice affected RI #15; one of four sampled residents reviewed for nutrition. Findings include: RI #15 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A review of RI #15's medical record revealed on 1/19/2021, the resident weighed 210.6 pounds. RI #15's Significant Change in Status Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an assessment reference date of 3/3/2021 indicated the resident was totally dependent on the staff for eating. The MDS listed RI #15 as having a weight of 203 pounds during this assessment period. A review of RI #15's medical record indicated on 3/21/2021, the resident was ordered a pureed diet with nectar thick liquids. A review of RI #15's medical record revealed on 6/2/2021, the resident weighed 214 pounds. During lunch meal observations on 6/7/2021 at 12:53 PM and 6/8/2021 at…

    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

$18,348 in federal fines across 4 penalties. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.

  • $4,587 — penalty dated 2023-09-11
  • $4,587 — penalty dated 2023-09-05
  • $4,587 — penalty dated 2023-08-28
  • $4,587 — penalty dated 2023-08-21
  • Medicare payment denial — starting 2025-05-17 for 15 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 ARABELLA HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT — 12 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 1 of 52.6-1.6 vs chain
Health inspection 1 of 52.5-1.5 vs chain
Staffing 3 of 52.9+0.1 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 53.3+0.7 vs chain
The other 11 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.6★, 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
ARABELLA HEALTH & WELLNESS OF GRAND BAY HOLDCO LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 11/15/2024
BREDLEGS HOLDINGS LLCOrganizationINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/13/2025
DEB EL INVESTMENT GROUP LLCOrganizationINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFsince 11/15/2024
ARABELLA HEALTH & WELLNESS OF GRAND BAY PROPCO LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/13/2025
ARABELLA HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 12/17/2024
HERTZEL, CHAIMIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 01/03/2025
RAY, KRISTINAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 11/15/2024
WILLIAMS, JEFFREYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 11/15/2024
FEIN, MIRIAMIndividualTRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 11/15/2024
ZLOTOWITZ, ELIYAHUIndividualTRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 11/15/2024
ARABELLA HEALTH & WELLNESS OF PENSACOLA PROPCO HOLDCO LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 11/15/2024
ARCO KANO IRRV TROrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 01/13/2025
CAMDEN WV LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 11/15/2024
GNH IRRV TROrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 01/13/2025
HEALTHCARE INVESTMENT HOLDINGS LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 11/15/2024
HWOOD PARTNERS LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 01/13/2025
FEIN, SETHIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 11/15/2024

CMS files one row per role, so the 22 rows in the source record cover these 17 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

11 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.

$6.3M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-9.4%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 67%Medicare 1%Other / private 32%

A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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

$262per resident / day
operating cost
$7,964per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$240per 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 015406. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2023-08-17, 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