Diversicare Of Big Springs
500 St. Clair Avenue Southwest, Huntsville, AL 35801 · For profit - Corporation · 145 certified beds · (256) 539-5111 Medicare & Medicaid certified
On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- its last standard health inspection was over 4 years ago — the star rating may not reflect current conditions
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 2 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 improved from 3 to 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 4.8% | 12.0% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 2.8% | 5.4% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 1.0% | 1.0% | 0.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.5% | 2.4% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 1.4% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.6% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 0.8% | 3.3% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 4.5% | 12.1% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 15.8% | 24.5% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 93.5% | 94.8% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.8% | 5.4% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 17.5% | 12.8% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 17.0% | 21.2% | 17.1% | typical |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.9% | 2.0% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 55.1% | 80.3% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 28.4% | 24.8% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 16.4% | 11.3% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.07 | 1.96 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 3.72 | 1.70 | 1.80 | worse |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
51.5% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 152 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 50.6% 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 79 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 0.29 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 44% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 16% 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
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 51.5%CMS range 43.0–57.5 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 11.4%CMS range 8.6–14.5 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 50.6% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 49.4% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 34.2% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 96.3% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 96.2% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 discharge | 93.9% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.7%CMS range 4.5–12.1 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.76 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 145 beds and averages 124.0 residents a day — about 86% occupied, or roughly 21 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 3.12 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.56 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.04 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 2.57 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.35 on weekdays — 23% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.68 to 0.27 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 47% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 4 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
9 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Potential for harm · D2022-01-27 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — isolatedHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
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, a review of the, Grievance Log and a facility policy titled, Customer Concern (Grievance) Policy, the facility failed to ensure the grievance process was followed when RI (Resident Identifier) #149's sponsor filed a grievance on 07/30/21. This deficient practice affected RI #149 one of three residents whose grievances were reviewed. Findings include: On 11/03/21, the State Agency received a complaint which alleged RI #149's missing clothes would be replacement and mailed to the complainant, however, the complainant had not received them. A review of a facility policy titled, Customer Concern (Grievance ) Policy, with an effective date of July 2018 revealed: .PURPOSE Support each customer's (patient's/resident's) right to voice concerns (grievances) and to ensure after receiving a concern, the center actively seeks a resolution and keeps the customer appropriately apprised of its progress toward resolution. PROCESS: . It is best practice for the Administrator to follow up with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-01-27 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide 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 observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure Resident Identifier (RI) #45's 02 (Oxygen) tubing/humidifier water bottle was dated and labeled; and the resident's nebulizer mask was stored in a covering on three of three days of survey. These deficient practices affected RI #'s 45 one of four residents sampled for oxygen therapy. Findings include: (1) RI #45 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses to include Acute and Chronic Respiratory Failure and Dependence on Supplemental Oxygen. RI #45's January 2022 Order Summary Report (Physician Orders) revealed RI #45 had physicians orders to apply oxygen at 3 liters via (by way) nasal cannula as needed for SOB (shortness of Breath), and Albuterol Sulfate Nebulization Solution 1 vial via nebulizer three times a day. On 01/25/2022 at 5:35 PM, the surveyor observed RI #45's 02 infusing by way of a nasal cannula/concentrator. RI #45's 02 tubing was not dated/labeled, and RI #45's nebulizer face mask…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2021-03-26 · tag F0947 — failed to train nurse aides adequately — isolatedEnsure nurse aides have the skills they need to care for residents, and give nurse aides education in dementia care and abuse prevention.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interviews and facility documents titled Team Member In-Service Record the facility failed to include DementiaTraining in the required 12 hour annual training for CNAs (Certified Nursing Assistants), Employee Identifiers' (EI) EI #1 and EI #2. This deficient practice affected 2 of 9 CNA's whose training records were reviewed for Dementia Training. Findings Include: Review of EI #1 and EI #2 Team Member In-Service Record revealed the CNAs had not received Dementia Training as required to be included in their annual training for the year 2020. EI #1 was hired 01/04/2018. EI #2 was hired 01/07/2020. On 03/26/21 at 10:40 AM, an interview was conducted with EI #9, Director of Clinical Operations. EI #9 was asked what Dementia Training have EI #1 and EI #2 received. EI #9 said they had not received any. EI #9 was asked why was there no CEU (Continue Education Units) training for EI #1and EI #2. EI #9 said because their corporate office called back and stated that the 2020 training had dropped off for 2020 and they did not complete the program. EI #9 was asked who was responsible…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2019-07-18 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 2017 Food Code, the facility failed to ensure: 1. the three-compartment sink and the food preparation sink drain pipes did not extend into the floor drains to create potential for backflow; 2. condensation from an air conditioning ventilation duct did not drip onto the surface of a food assembly area and onto individually wrapped ready-to-eat food; and 3. milk in the milk cooler was not expired. This had the potential to affect 108 residents receiving meals from the kitchen, 108 of 112 residents. Findings Include: 1. A review of the FDA 2017 Food Code revealed: . 5-402.11 Backflow Prevention. (A) . a direct connection may not exist between the SEWAGE system and a drain originating from EQUIPMENT in which FOOD, portable EQUIPMENT, or UTENSILS are placed. An observation made on 7/15/19 at 4:19 PM, revealed the food preparation sink's drain pipe descending into the floor drain. The pipe descended below the floor grade. An observation on 7/16/19 at 9:13 AM, was made of the three-compartment sink. The drain…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-07-18 · tag F0638 — isolatedAssure that each resident’s assessment is updated at least once every 3 months.
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, interview, and review of the document titled, Resident Assessment Instrument User's Manual Version 3.0,the facility failed to ensure a timely Minimal Data Set (MDS) quarterly assessment was completed for Resident Identifier (RI) #2. This affected one of twenty-four sampled residents. Findings Include: A review of a document titled, Facility Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) 3.0 User's Manual Version 1.16 , with a revised date of October 2018, page 2-17, revealed: RAI OBRA (Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act)-required Assessment Summary .Quarterly (Non-comprehensive) . Assessment Reference Date (ARD) .No later than .ARD of Previous OBRA assessment of any type + 92 calendar days .Regulatory Requirement .(every 3 months) . RI #2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of heart failure, unspecified. On 7/18/19 at 11:13 AM a review of RI #2's MDS revealed no MDS assessments were completed since the 3/07/2019 Significant Change in Status MDS. On 7/18/19 at 11:43 AM an…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2019-07-18 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide 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 record review, the facility failed to ensure that Oxygen cannula tubing was provided with a date when changed out by nursing. This affected Resident Identifier (RI) #6, one of two residents who were observed with utilizing oxygen therapy. Findings include: RI #6 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included chronic respiratory failure and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. A review of RI #6's physician's orders included Oxygen 3 liter per nasal cannula . On 07/17/19 at 03:38 PM, an observation was made of RI #6's oxygen in use per nasal cannula with oxygen concentrator. The oxygen concentrator machine was set on 3 liters per nasal cannula. The water bottle was dated 7/15/19, however, the nasal cannula tubing was not dated. On 07/18/19 at 09:33 AM, a second observation was made of the oxygen in use by nasal cannula with oxygen concentrator. The oxygen concentrator machine was set on 3 liters per nasal cannula. The water bottle was dated 7/15/19, however, 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.
- Potential for harm · D2019-07-18 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
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 medical record review, interview and review of a facility document titled, Medication error, the facility failed to ensure Resident Identifier (RI) #107's order for Eliquis 5 milligrams (MG) by mouth (PO) twice a day (BID) with no end date was not discontinued in error by a licensed nurse on 07/08/19. The medication error was significant due to the drug's classification as an anticoagulant. This affected RI #107, one of 24 sampled residents whose medications were reviewed. Findings Included: A review of a facility document titled, Medication error, with the Date: 7/17/2019, documented: .Incident Description Nursing Description: Resident's eliquis was discontinued in error by nursing caring for (him/her) on 7/8/19 . Immediate Action Taken Description: Contacted M.D., received verbal order for eliquis 5mg, 2 tabs(tablets) PO BID x (times) 7 days, then eliquis 5mg PO BID x 6 months . RI #107 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A review of RI #107's medical record revealed a Doppler Report with a Date…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-07-18 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted 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 interview, and review of Resident Identifier (RI) #260's medical record, the facility failed to ensure that the Code Status for RI #260 matched through-out the medical record. This deficiency affected one of one resident reviewed for accurate code status. Findings include: RI #260 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis to include small cell lung cancer. On [DATE] at 4:06 PM a more thorough investigation of RI #260's medical record revealed that the code status differed in multiple areas. The first page of the medical record had a page with a stop sign and DNR, the second page was the resuscitation order depicting No Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), and the third page noted was a bright green paper with big bold letters spelling Full Code. The Care Plan revealed that RI #260 was care planned for full code, while the Physicians orders dated [DATE] included Do not resuscitate (DNR) On [DATE] at 04:50 PM, an interview with Employee identifier (EI) #6 Registered Nurse, Unit Manager was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-07-18 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide 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 observations, interviews, medical record reviews and review of a facility policy titled, Handwashing/Hand Hygiene, the facility failed to ensure: 1. a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) changed gloves after providing incontinence care for Resident Identifier (RI) #107 before touching the resident's bed covers and washed her hands after removing her gloves before leaving RI #107's room; and 2. a CNA washed her hands after removing her gloves and applying clean gloves during incontinence care for RI #34. These deficient practices affected RI #107 and #34, two of 24 sampled residents. Findings Included: A review of a facility policy titled, Handwashing/Hand Hygiene, with an Effective Date: November 1, 2017, documented: . Policy Interpretation And Implementation . 2. All team members shall follow the handwashing/hand hygiene procedures to help prevent the spread of infections to other team members, residents, and visitors.5. Use an alcohol-based hand rub or, alternatively, soap . and water for the following…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to DIVERSICARE HEALTHCARE — 44 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 →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 4 of 5 | 2.6 | +1.4 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 4 of 5 | 2.5 | +1.5 vs chain |
| Staffing | 4 of 5 | 3.0 | +1.0 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 3 of 5 | 3.5 | -0.5 vs chain |
The other 43 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.6★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 43; lowest-rated first.
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 / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DIVERSICARE LEASING COMPANY II LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 01/13/2014 |
| ADVOCAT FINANCE, LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 01/13/2014 |
| DAC NEWCORP INC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 04/04/2022 |
| DIVERSICARE MANAGEMENT SERVICES LP. | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 10/10/1996 |
| GASPAR, ENRICO | Individual | CONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEE; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/05/2021 |
| COX, BEVERLY | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/27/2023 |
| KELLMAN, FRANKLIN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 09/13/2024 |
| KOHN, BRIAN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 11/19/2021 |
| RATNER, ERAN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 09/13/2024 |
| BODIE, REBECCA | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 03/02/2020 |
| NEE, STEPHEN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 02/20/2023 |
| WEISHAAR, MATTHEW | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 12/01/2003 |
| DMS GP LLC | Organization | GENERAL PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 04/04/2022 |
| DIVERSICARE HEALTHCARE SERVICES LLC | Organization | LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 04/04/2022 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 17 rows in the source record cover these 14 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
6 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.
This home reported $783K 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 2023. 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
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). 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
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Alabama Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 015111. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2022-01-27, 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.