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

Arbor Springs Health And Rehab Center, LTD

1910 Pepperell Pkwy, Opelika, AL 36801 · For profit - Partnership · 225 certified beds · (334) 749-1471 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (334) 749-1471 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 11 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.

In its favor
  • 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)
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • its payroll-based staffing score sits well above its independent inspection score
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
  • its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
  • about 23% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
  • 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.

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

Worth a closer look. This home's staffing rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the staffing score rests on the facility's own payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★ 3/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
Ben Drake0.2 mi
121 N. 20th Street, Building 6 · (334) 749-3385 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
1713 Pepperell Pkwy · (334) 745-3632 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
1904 Pepperell Pkwy · (334) 203-1311 · Call to confirm hours
Park
(334) 705-5551 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 2 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 2 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 3 of 5

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 2 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating2★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased23.9%12.0%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight13.0%5.4%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder2.3%1.0%0.9%worse
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection3.9%2.4%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.2%1.4%6.5%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.6%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury3.4%3.3%3.3%typical
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened24.2%12.1%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication17.3%24.5%18.9%typical
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine99.2%94.8%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers5.6%5.4%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control24.0%12.8%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table20.5%21.2%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication1.1%2.0%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine96.9%80.3%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission22.4%24.8%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit11.4%11.3%12.0%typical
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.961.961.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.151.701.80better

On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.

§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.

CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

57.6% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 222 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

57.6%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
7.6%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
45.4%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.28U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.12hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.10hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.05hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 45.4% 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 163 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 0.28 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 42% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 12% 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 SNF57.6%CMS range 52.0–64.251.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF7.6%CMS range 5.5–10.410.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge45.4%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge52.1%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge34.4%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified99.0%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 setting99.3%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.5%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 worsened1.5%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization4.7%CMS range 2.4–7.77.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.701.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

0.71
RN hours/ resident / day
1.19
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.67
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.57
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.52
RN hoursweekends
49.7%
Total nursing turnover
31.6%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 225 beds and averages 121.5 residents a day — about 54% occupied, or roughly 104 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.57 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.71 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.67 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.81 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.87 on weekdays — 22% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.78 to 0.52 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 50% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

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

3
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2022-02-24)
5
at the previous standard inspection (2019-06-06)

Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

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.

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.

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

  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2022-02-24 · 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 the facility's food contract company's policy, Bulk Food - Delivery and Usage, the facility failed to ensure food with an expired use by date was discarded, placing 114 of 117 residents in the facility at risk for foodborne illness if served. Findings include: The facility's contract food service company's undated policy Bulk Food - Delivery and Usage, revealed, .The bulk meals should be held at the proper temperature in the refrigerator and served to residents within 3 days of preparation. During an observation on 02/21/2022 from 9:45 AM to 9:58 AM, the following items prepared in another town by the food service contract company's central kitchen and stored on shelving in the walk-in cooler were observed: - Three large aluminum pans (full size steam table pans) containing chicken pot pie and labeled with a prepared date of 02/15/2022 and a use by date of 02/18/2022 - One small aluminum pan (1/2 size steam table pan) containing pureed chicken pot pie and labeled with a prepared date of 02/15/2022 and a use by date of 02/18/2022 - One…

    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 · D2022-02-24 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, observation, interviews, and review of a facility policy titled, Catheter Care, the facility failed to ensure thorough cleaning of the penis during indwelling urinary catheter care for Resident Identifier (RI) #86, increasing the resident's risk for a urinary tract infection (UTI). The deficient practice affected RI #86, one of two residents sampled with an indwelling urinary catheter. Findings include: Review of a facility policy titled, Catheter Care, dated 06/01/2021, revealed: . Male: .15. Using circular motion, cleanse the meatus with a clean cloth moistened with water and perineal cleaner (soap). 16. With a new moistened cloth, starting at the urinary meatus moving down, cleanse the shaft of the penis . RI #86 was most recently admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses to include Retention of Urine and Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH) with Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms. A review of RI #86's February 2022 Physician Orders, revealed an order dated 06/08/2021 directing…

    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 · D2022-02-24 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and interviews,the facility failed to ensure: 1) Resident Identifier (RI) #223's oxygen was administered in accordance with the physician's order; and 2) RI #220's nebulizer mask and tubing was stored in a manner to prevent potential contamination when not in use. This deficient practice affected RI #223 and RI #220, two of four residents sampled for respiratory care. Findings include: 1) RI #223 was most recently admitted to the facility on [DATE]. RI #223's diagnoses list included the following: Acute and Chronic Respiratory Failure with Hypoxia (oxygen deficiency), Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), and Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA, temporary cessation of breathing during sleep). A review of RI #223's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated RI #223 had no cognitive impairment with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 out of 15. The resident required extensive assistance of one person for their activities of daily living (ADLs).…

    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 · Fcited before2019-06-06 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interviews and a review of the 2017 Food and Drug Administration Food Code, and facility policies related to Food Storage, the facility failed to: 1) completely air dry utensils, dishes and trays prior to storage and use; 2) consistently label food with preparation and use-by date (UBD) and discard food in a timely manner; 3) completely cover refrigerated food prior to storage; 4) ensure milk was stored in a manner to retain a recommended safe temperature of 41 degrees or less on the 6/4/19 lunch tray line; and hot food was maintained above 135 degrees F on the 06/05/19 tray line; 5) wash hands between dirty and clean tasks; and 6) maintain frozen food in a solid state during storage. These infractions had the potential to affect all 153 residents for whom meals were prepared and served at the time of this survey. Findings Included: 1) AIR DRYING The 2017 Food Code mandates under 4-901.11 Equipment and Utensils, Air-Drying Required. After cleaning and SANITIZING, EQUIPMENT AND UTENSILS: (A) Shall be air-dried . (B) May not be cloth dried . On 06/04/19 at 11:30…

    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 · F2019-06-06 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — widespread
    Keep all essential equipment working safely.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interviews and a review of the 2017 Food Code, the facility failed to ensure the Hot Box consistently maintained temperatures above 135 degrees Fahrenheit (F) for the storage of foods to be served from the 06/05/19 supper meal. This had the potential to affect all 153 residents who received special food requests (such as sweet potato fries, fried fish, grilled cheese sandwiches) or planned (replacement) food added to the line as needed. Findings Included: The 2017 Food and Drug Administration Food Code, regulation #3-501.16 Time/Temperature Control for Safety Food, Hot and Cold Holding specifies under (A) Except during preparation, cooking, or cooling . TIME/TEMPERATURE CONTROL FOR SAFETY FOOD shall be maintained: (1) At 135 degrees F or above . During the 06/05/19 supper tray line at 5:05 PM, the heated reach in Hot Box at the start of the tray line displayed a temperature of 98 degrees, which soon thereafter, dropped to 95 degrees. The Surveyor asked the Certified Dietary Manager (Employee Identifier/EI) #2 what food items were stored inside. EI #2 explained…

    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.

    Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2019-06-06 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — pattern
    Ensure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews, record review and review of a facility policy titled, Enteral Tube Feeding via Continuous Pump, with a revised date on March 2015, the facility failed to ensure licensed staff applied a label, with required information, onto Resident Identifier (RI) #110 and RI #351's tube feeding bottles. This affected two of three residents observed for tube feedings on one of three days of the survey. Findings include: Review of a facility policy titled Enteral Tube Feeding via Continuous Pump, revised 3/2015, revealed the following: . Initiate Feeding . 5. On the formula label document initials, date, time the formula was hung/administered, and initial that the label was checked against the order . 1. RI #110 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Diagnoses included Dysphagia and gastrostomy status. On 6/4/19 at 4:20 PM, the surveyor observered a Glucerna 1.2 Cal bottle hanging and connected to RI #110. There was no label noted on the bottle. 2. RI #351 was admitted…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-06-06 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure RL(Room Locator) #'s 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12, did not have a toilet with exposed rusty bolts. This affected resident bathrooms on 4 of 9 halls of the facility. Findings include: On 06/04/2019, during the initial tour of the facility, the following was observed in resident bathrooms. RL 1 had a missing bolt cover on the left side rusted appearance uncapped. RL 2 had a missing bolt cover on the left and right side with rusted appearance uncapped. RL 3 had a rusted toilet bowl bolt with no caps on the right and left side. RL 4 had no toilet bowl bolt cover on right and left side. RL 5 had rusted toilet bowl bolts uncapped on the right and left side. RL 6 had rusted toilet bowl bolts with uncapped on the right and left side RL 7 had rusted toilet bowl bolts uncapped. RL 8 had rusted toilet bowl bolts that were uncapped. RL 9 had missing cover on right side and the bolt was rusty in appearance on the toilet. RL 10 had a missing cover on the right side of the toilet bolt that was rusty. RL 11 had a missing…

    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 · Dcited before2019-06-06 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews, medical record review, and a review of the facility's policies titled, Personal Protective Equipment - Gloves and Handwashing / Hand Hygiene, the facility failed to ensure nursing staff wash their hands: 1. after removing gloves; 2. before leaving the resident's room; 3. after cleaning stool from a resident's buttocks, and 4. touching clean items, such as a new container of perineal wipes and a clean brief, while providing incontinence care to Resident Identifier #137. This affect one of three observations of incontinence care. Findings Include: A review of the facility's policy titled, Personal Protective Equipment - Gloves, with a revised date of July 2009, revealed: Policy Statement Gloves must be worn when handling blood, body fluids, secretions, excretions, mucous membranes and/or non-intact skin. Policy Interpretation and Implementation . 8. Wash your hands after removing gloves. A review of the facility's policy titled, Handwashing/Hand Hygiene, with a revised date of…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2018-06-21 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interviews, and review of a facility policy titled Main Dining Room Meal Service Assistance, the facility failed to ensure Resident Identifier (RI) #84 did not have to wait for his/her supper meal on 6/19/18 while other residents at the tables were already dining. This affected one resident, seated at one of 12 tables, in the main dining room for the supper meal on 6/19/18. Findings include: A review of the facility policy titled Main Dining Room Meal Service Assistance, implemented 4/3/2017, revealed: . 4. Meal observation will reflect: 1. Meals provided to all residents at a table at the same time. On 6/19/18 at 5:00 PM, RI # 84 was observed sitting at a table with four other residents in the main dining room. RI # 84 received his/her supper tray 25 minutes after the other residents at the table had received their trays. RI #84 was observed to ask the dietitian about his/her tray. RI #84's tray was pulled from the food cart 25 minutes after the other residents at the table had received their trays and were almost finished eating their meals. On 6/19/18 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2018-06-21 · 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 interview, record review, and review of the facility policy titled Use of Side Rails, the facility failed to ensure an individualized plan of care that addressed the use of top 1/4 (quarter) side rails was developed for Resident Identifier (RI) #66. The facility further failed to ensure a urinary catheter care plan was developed for RI #89. This affected two of 32 sampled residents whose care plans were reviewed. Findings include: 1) Review of an undated policy titled Use of Side Rails revealed the following: Policy: The facility must ensure that residents receive treatment and care in accordance with . the comprehensive person-centered care plan . Policy statement: .5. The resident's specific use of side rails will be addressed in the residents' care plan. RI #66 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Dementia and a history of Femur Fracture. Review of RI #66's care plan for ADL (Activity of Daily Living) assistance/self care deficit related to dementia with a problem onset of 4/13/18…

    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 · Dcited before2018-06-21 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, interviews, and review of the facility's policies titled . Infection Control and Standard Precautions, the facility failed to ensure Resident Identifier (RI) #31's catheter tubing and bag were not directly on the floor. Further, the facility failed to ensure Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs) removed their gloves and washed their hands after providing catheter care to RI #76, before touching the tube feeding pump, placing a clean pad under the resident, and touching the resident's body. This affected two of four residents sampled for catheters. Findings include: A review of a facility policy titled . Infection Control, with a revised date of August 2007, revealed: . Policy Statement This facility's infection control policies and practices are intended to facilitate maintaining a safe, sanitary . environment . to help prevent and manage transmission of diseases and infections. 1) RI #31 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of Urinary Retention. RI #31's…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to TRAYLOR PORTER HEALTHCARE — 5 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 2 of 53.0-1.0 vs chain
Health inspection 2 of 52.0≈ chain avg
Staffing 4 of 54.4-0.4 vs chain
Quality measures 2 of 53.8-1.8 vs chain
The other 4 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.0★, 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
PORTER, HOWARDIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; GENERAL PARTNERSHIP INTEREST50%since 02/27/2009
TRAYLOR, JONATHANIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; GENERAL PARTNERSHIP INTEREST50%since 02/27/2009
MAX CREDIT UNIONOrganization5% OR GREATER SECURITY INTERESTsince 05/12/2011
TRAYLOR PORTER HEALTH CARE MANAGEMENT INCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; GENERAL PARTNERSHIP INTERESTsince 02/10/2009

CMS files one row per role, so the 9 rows in the source record cover these 4 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

2 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.

$13.2M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-7.9%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$3.2M
Related-party expense23% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 50%Medicare 7%Other / private 43%

This home reported $3.2M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 23% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. 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

$331per resident / day
operating cost
$10,053per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$307per 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 015192. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2022-02-24, 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