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

Fountainview Ctr For Alzheimer

2631 North Druid Hills Road N E, Atlanta, GA 30329 · For profit - Individual · 120 certified beds · (404) 325-7994 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Flagged for abuse3 immediate-jeopardy citations$45,465 in federal fines1 Medicare payment denial
Insights

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

Worth asking about
  • CMS has flagged it for abuse
  • it has abuse, neglect, or exploitation citations (F0600, F0610) — most recent Aug 2025
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0605) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • inspectors cited 3 immediate-jeopardy problems — the most serious level
  • the CMS record shows $45,465 in federal fines (most recent 2025-08-17)
  • its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)

One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.

A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.

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

Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.

Location & what’s nearby

Urgent care / clinic
1045 Research Center Atlanta Dr SW Ste A · (404) 696-1773 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
5815 Campbellton Rd SW · (404) 346-4164 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
5829 Campbellton Rd SW Ste 110 · (404) 346-4170 · Call to confirm hours
Park
5320 Campbellton Rd SW · (404) 346-8360 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
4895 Campbellton Rd SW · (404) 346-5533

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 3 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

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

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

Overall rating2★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased9.0%15.3%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight6.1%5.6%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.7%0.9%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.5%2.5%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.0%11.3%6.5%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury4.6%3.2%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened8.3%15.2%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication13.2%20.5%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%95.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers5.2%5.6%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control13.2%15.8%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table39.6%19.9%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication13.6%2.6%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine43.2%78.4%79.4%worse
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission5.8%25.0%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit13.1%11.6%12.0%typical
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.412.151.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.541.901.80better

* 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.

§ 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.

34.8% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that worse than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 46 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

34.8%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.2%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
45.0%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.12U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.05hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.03hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.04hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 45.0% 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 20 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 0.12 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 8% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 17% 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 SNF34.8%CMS range 23.8–48.451.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024worse than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.2%CMS range 6.7–14.810.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge45.0%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 discharge50.0%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge30.0%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization5.6%CMS range 2.6–10.57.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.991.02Oct 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

0.32
RN hours/ resident / day
1.02
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.44
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.78
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.11
RN hoursweekends
44.9%
Total nursing turnover
75.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 120 beds and averages 113.6 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 6 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 3.78 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.32 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.44 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.03 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.08 on weekdays — 26% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.40 to 0.11 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 45% 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

5
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-05-16)
6
at the previous standard inspection (2024-01-18)

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

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

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

  • Immediate jeopardy · J2025-08-17 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
    Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, record review, and review of the facility policy titled, Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from sexual abuse for three of six residents reviewed for abuse (Resident (R) 2, R3, and R6). Specifically, R1 displayed inappropriate sexual behaviors towards others on 6/20/2025 when she grabbed a male housekeeper's private area (groin) and buttocks. The resident's inappropriate sexual behavior towards staff members progressed to resident's on the South Pavillion unit sustaining sexual abuse. Even though the facility was aware of R1's inappropriate sexual behavior and her abuse of other residents, the facility failed to implement any interventions to protect the residents who resided on the unit. The facility's failure to ensure residents were free from abuse had caused or was likely to cause serious injury, harm, impairment, or death to a resident. An Immediate Jeopardy was identified on 8/15/2025 and was determined to exist on 6/20/2025. The…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Immediate jeopardy · J2025-08-17 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
    Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, record review, and review of the facility policy titled, Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation, the facility failed to complete a thorough investigation which included interviewing and/or assessing other residents who resided on the South Pavillion unit and interviewing staff who worked on the unit for two of two abuse investigations involving residents (Resident (R) 1, R2, and R3). Also, during the facility's investigation, the Administrator who was the Abuse Coordinator failed to thoroughly investigate and identify Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) 2's failure to protect R3 when she discovered R3 in R1's room with his pants off; instead of intervening, the CNA left the resident's room and reported her observations to the nurse. Additionally, the facility failed to protect all residents who resided on the unit when R1's level of supervision (LOS) was not assessed or increased when R1 started engaging in inappropriate sexual behaviors towards other residents which was determined to be sexual abuse. These…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Immediate jeopardy · J2025-08-17 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
    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, Comprehensive Care Plans, the facility failed to revise the resident's care plan with nonpharmacological interventions for inappropriate sexual behavior for one of nine sampled residents (Resident (R) 1). This failure led to multiple residents on the South Pavillion unit being victims of sexual abuse by R1. Cross Reference: F600 Free from Abuse and Neglect.The facility's failure to ensure R1's care plan was revised with interventions protecting residents from sexual abuse had caused or was likely to cause serious injury, harm, impairment, or death to a resident. An Immediate Jeopardy was identified on 8/15/2025 and was determined to exist on 6/20/2025. R1's care plan focus was revised to identify the problem of the resident engaging in inappropriate sexual behavior; however, there were no revisions to the interventions for R1's inappropriate sexual behavior. The Administrator and the Director of Nursing (DON) were notified of the…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Actual harm · Gcited before2024-01-18 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
    Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, record review, and review of the policy titled Pressure Injury Prevention and Management, the facility failed to implement pressure injury interventions to prevent the development of unstageable pressure ulcers for two of five sampled residents (R) (R37 and R98) reviewed for pressure ulcers; failed to conduct weekly skin assessments of R98's left hip DTI (deep tissue injury) and document treatments to R98's left hip for 10 days. Harm was identified to occur on 9/6/2023 for R37 when an unstageable DTI developed on the right heel, and then increased to a Stage 3 pressure ulcer. In addition, harm was identified to occur on 1/1/2024 when the facility failed to transcribe wound care orders for R98, resulting in the development of a DTI to the left hip, which after debridement developed into a Stage 4 pressure ulcer. Findings include: Review of the policy titled Pressure Injury Prevention and Management, dated 4/4/2022, revealed the policy indicates the facility is committed to the…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-05-16 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — isolated
    Prevent the use of unnecessary psychotropic medications or use medications that may restrain a resident's ability to function.
    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, staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure targeted behaviors and potential side effects were monitored for administered psychotropic medications for one of five residents (Resident (R) 82) reviewed for unnecessary medications out of 24 sampled residents. This had the potential for unwarranted medication use and for adverse reactions due to potentially unnecessary medications. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Behavior Tracking last revised 02/05/04 revealed, Each resident must receive and the facility must provide the necessary care and services to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial wellbeing, in accordance with the comprehensive assessment and plan of care. Purpose: the purpose of behavior tracking is to provide insight into the behavioral symptoms of our residents by tracking all behavioral occurrences during a determined period. Review of the facility's policy titled,…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-16 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
    Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, resident family and staff interviews, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to prevent and provide treatment for one resident (Resident (R) 91) of three sampled residents reviewed for pressures ulcers out of 24 sampled residents. This failure had the potential for R91's sacrum wound to delay healing and/or worsen. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Pressure Injury Prevention and Management, dated 04/04/22 revealed .c. Evidence-based interventions for prevention will be implemented for all residents who are assessed at risk or who have a pressure injury present. Basic or routine care interventions could include but are not limited to: . iii. Provide appropriate, pressure-redistributing, support surfaces; . Review of the facility's policy titled, Turning & Repositioning, dated 01/30/05 revealed 1. A resident that is identified either by a staff member or through the assessment process as having mobility limitations will be assisted, turned and/or…

    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 · D2025-05-16 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolated
    Provide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, staff interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure nonpharmacological interventions were implemented for one of 24 sampled residents (Resident (R) 5). This failure placed the resident at risk for unmanaged pain and at risk for unnecessary medication use. Findings include: Review of R5's undated admission Record, located in the resident's electronic medical record (EMR) under the Profile tab revealed the facility admitted R5 on 05/18/21 with diagnoses including dementia, and chronic pain. Review of R5's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 04/15/25, documented R5 was severely cognitively impaired and was on opioid medication. R5 did not receive nonpharmacological interventions for pain. Review of R5's Care Plan for, initiated 04/29/25 and located in the resident's EMR under the Care Plan tab revealed [R5] pain related to OA [osteoarthritis] right shoulder, chronic pain, radicular pain right arm, peripheral neuropathy, rheumatoid arthritis. The Care Plan interventions included Administer medications as…

    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 · D2025-05-16 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — isolated
    Implement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
    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, staff interviews, facility policy review, review of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidance, and review of the McGreer criteria for antibiotic use for urinary tract infections (UTIs), the facility failed to maintain a functional Antibiotic Stewardship Program that ensured an antibiotic prescribed and administered met the McGreer criteria and CDC guidance for one of two residents (Resident (R) 95) residents reviewed for antibiotic stewardship out of a total sample of 24 residents. This had the potential for the development of antibiotic-resistant organisms. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Infection Prevention and Control Program dated 01/09/25 revealed . 4. Antibiotic Stewardship, a. Culture reports, sensitivity data, and antibiotic usage reviews are included in surveillance activities. b. Medical criteria and standardized definitions of infections are used to help recognize and manage infections. c. Antibiotic usage is evaluated and…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2024-01-18 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, interviews, manufacturer instruction review, and review of facility policies, the facility failed to discard containers of buttermilk with expired manufacturer's expiration dates, failed to date nutritional supplements when removed from freezer storage and when opened, and failed to clean drawers that contained food products. These failures had the potential to affect all 114 residents who resided in the facility. Findings included: Review of the policy titled, Storage, dated March 2018, indicated Refrigerated Storage 1. Store perishable food in refrigerator and/or foods marked 'Keep Refrigerated' by the manufacturer . 3. Use FIFO [first in first out] when stocking and rotating shelves. Review of the policy titled, Routine Cleaning Programming Rooms, dated 6/1/2016, indicated the policy of (the facility) is to ensure the provision of routine cleaning in order to provide a safe environment in all Programming Rooms . 3. Routine surface cleaning will be conducted with detailed focus on visibly soiled surface and high touch areas to include, but not limited to: .…

    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 · F2024-01-18 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespread
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on documentation review and staff interviews, the facility failed to have a documented water management program that included measures to monitor and prevent the growth of opportunistic water-borne pathogens. This had the potential to affect all 114 of 114 residents that resided at the facility. Findings included: Review of facility documents provided by the Administrator revealed a lack of a water management program to monitor and prevent the growth of opportunistic water-borne pathogens. Interview on 1/18/2024 at 11:39 am, the Maintenance Director confirmed the facility did not have a documented water management system in place to prevent the growth of Legionella in the facility. The Maintenance Director stated Legionella was a bacterium that grew in water, and he was aware of the areas in the building that needed to be checked for Legionella, such as showers and sinks not in use in resident rooms. The Maintenance Director indicated he was running water in the vacant resident room showers monthly but did not document it in his electronic maintenance software program.…

    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 · D2024-01-18 · tag F0582 — isolated
    Give residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
    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, staff interview, review of Medicare Advanced Beneficiary Notice (ABN) instructions, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure each resident receiving skilled services under Medicare Part A whose services were being terminated received the appropriate form, Skilled Nursing Facility Advance Beneficiary Notice of Non-coverage (SNFABN) Medicare Form 10055, indicating termination date and appeal options for two of three residents (R) R86 and R20, reviewed for Beneficiary Notices. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Advance Beneficiary Notices, dated 2/1/2018, revealed it is the policy of the [name] center to provide timely notices regarding Medicare eligibility and coverage. Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines: Number 4. The facility shall inform Medicare beneficiaries of his or her potential liability for payment. A liability notice shall be issued to Medicare beneficiaries upon admission or during a resident's stay, before the facility provides: Number…

    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 · D2024-01-18 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, record review, and review of the policy titled Comprehensive Care Plans, the facility failed to implement the comprehensive person-centered plan of care for one two residents (R) (R53) reviewed for restorative rehabilitation services. The facility's failure to apply a hand splint to R53's contracted left hand as directed in the resident's plan of care placed the resident at risk of development of worsening contractures. Findings include: Review of the policy titled Comprehensive Care Plans, dated 9/1/2023, documented the policy of [name of facility] is to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with resident rights, that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental, and psychological needs that are identified in the resident's comprehensive assessment. Review of the clinical record revealed R53 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included hemiplegia…

    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 · D2024-01-18 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, record review, and review of the policy titled Range of Motion, the facility failed to apply a left-hand splint to prevent further contractures, as ordered for one of two residents (R) (R53) reviewed for limited range of motion and contractures. This failure had the potential to cause R53's contractures to worsen. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Range of Motion, dated 9/15/2004, indicated Purpose: [name of facility] is committed to ensuring that each resident reaches and maintains his or her highest level of range of motion and to preventing avoidable decline in range of motion (ROM). Implementation of this program is to maintain joint mobility and muscle strength, minimize contractures, increase strength and activity tolerance, reduce pain and minimize complications of mobility. Adequate preventive care may include and the application of splints and braces when appropriate. Review of the clinical record revealed R53 was admitted to the facility on…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • No harm found · C2025-05-16 · tag F0732 — widespread
    Post nurse staffing information every day.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility's policy, the facility failed to ensure daily nursing staffing data was posted and reflected the current staffing hours for three of four days of the survey. This deficient practice had the potential to adversely affect all residents and/or resident representatives by not being able to view the facility staffing levels. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Nurse Staffing Posting Information, revised 07/21/22 revealed 1. The Daily Staffing Sheet will be posted on a daily basis and will contain the following information: .d. The total number and the actual hours worked by the following categories of licensed and unlicensed staff directly responsible for resident care per shift: i. Registered Nurses ii. Licensed Practical Nurses/Licensed Vocational Nurses iii. Certified Nurse Aides 3. The information posted will be: a. Presented in a clear and readable format. b. ln a prominent place readily accessible to residents and visitors . During an interview on 05/15/25 at 4:50 PM, the…

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

    Nursing and Physician Services 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

$45,465 in federal fines across 3 penalties. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.

  • $33,430 — penalty dated 2025-08-17
  • $4,017 — penalty dated 2024-01-18
  • $8,018 — penalty dated 2024-01-18
  • Medicare payment denial — starting 2024-02-20 for 7 days

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

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
SMALL, DAVIDIndividual5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST20%since 06/15/2005
SMALL, WILLIAMIndividual5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF55%since 06/15/2005
COCKS, GEORGEIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 11/01/2006
FREEMAN, JULIUSIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/07/2024
FOUNTAINVIEW ACQUISITION CORPOrganizationGENERAL PARTNERSHIP INTERESTsince 04/15/2005
FOUNTAINVIEW HOLDINGS, LPOrganizationLIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTERESTsince 04/15/2005
JACKSON, RAMSEYIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 01/10/2010

CMS files one row per role, so the 12 rows in the source record cover these 7 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.

$11.7M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+4.8%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 57%Medicare 8%Other / private 35%

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

$336per resident / day
operating cost
$10,209per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$353per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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 GA

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 Georgia Medicaid page.

Typical monthly cost in Georgia
$8,821/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$9,429/mo
Nursing home (private)
$5,300/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 115697. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-05-16, 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