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

Pruitthealth - Virginia Park

1000 Briarcliff Road NE, Atlanta, GA 30306 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 128 certified beds · (404) 875-6456 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
2 immediate-jeopardy citations2 actual-harm citations CMS recorded as corrected before the inspection ended (past non-compliance)$8,788 in federal fines
Insights

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

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
Worth asking about
  • inspectors cited 2 immediate-jeopardy problems — the most serious level
  • inspectors recorded 2 serious findings as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (19) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • the CMS record shows $8,788 in federal fines (most recent 2025-06-12)
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
  • about 24% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies

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.

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

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★ 3/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
865 N Highland Ave NE · (800) 746-7287 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
865 N Highland Ave NE · (404) 733-6089 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
1050 N Highland Ave NE · (404) 815-8383 · Call to confirm hours
Park
1410 Ponce De Leon Ave NE · (404) 373-1060 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
999 Briarcliff Rd NE · (404) 371-9085

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 3 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 4 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 2 to 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

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

Overall rating3★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased13.2%15.3%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight8.4%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 infection1.0%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 injury2.3%3.2%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened17.8%15.2%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication7.8%20.5%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine88.8%95.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers9.6%5.6%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control11.8%15.8%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table12.8%19.9%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication4.5%2.6%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine99.2%78.4%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission16.9%25.0%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit5.3%11.6%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.522.151.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.521.901.80better

* 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.

65.1% 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 52 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

65.1%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.4%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
0.29U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.10hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.10hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.09hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.29 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 46% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 15% 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 SNF65.1%CMS range 51.8–75.551.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.4%CMS range 7.2–13.210.7%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 dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified87.1%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 worsened6.5%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization6.1%CMS range 3.3–10.47.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.011.02Oct 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

0.50
RN hours/ resident / day
0.96
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.26
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.72
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.26
RN hoursweekends
41.1%
Total nursing turnover
41.7%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 128 beds and averages 117.6 residents a day — about 92% occupied, or roughly 10 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 3.72 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.50 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.26 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 3.05 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.00 on weekdays — 24% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.59 to 0.26 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 41% 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 (2025-06-12)
6
at the previous standard inspection (2024-01-04)

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.

19 citations, most serious first. The 14 most serious are shown; the remaining 5 are one tap away and print in full.

  • Immediate jeopardy · Lcited before2022-06-16 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — widespread
    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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to maintain the facility at a safe temperature range of 71 to 81 degrees Fahrenheit (F) on four of four hallways, during four out of five survey days. Additionally, the facility failed to maintain a homelike environment for 24 of 63 rooms in the facility. On 6/16/2022, a determination was made that a situation in which the facility's noncompliance with one or more requirements of participation had caused or had the likelihood to cause, serious injury, harm, impairment, or death to residents. The facility's Administrator and Director of Health Services (DHS) were informed of the Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) on 6/16/2022 at 4:53 p.m. The noncompliance related to the immediate jeopardy was identified to have existed on 6/13/2022. The IJ is outlined as follows: The facility failed to maintain the facility at a safe temperature range of 71 to 81°F for 116 residents. Specifically, on 6/13/2022 at 3:30 p.m., the facility's hall temperatures were noted to be 84…

    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
  • Immediate jeopardy · L2022-06-16 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — widespread
    Set up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, interviews, and review of the policy titled Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) Plan, the facility failed to have an effective Quality Assurance process to implement action plans for identified systemic quality deficiencies. Specifically, the facility failed to maintain a safe temperature range of 71 to 81°F, during four out of five survey days. The census was 116. On 6/16/2022, a determination was made that a situation in which the facility's noncompliance with one or more requirements of participation had caused or had the likelihood to cause, serious injury, harm, impairment, or death to residents. The facility's Administrator and Director of Health Services (DHS) were informed of the Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) on 6/16/2022 at 4:53 p.m. The noncompliance related to the immediate jeopardy was identified to have existed on 6/13/2022. The IJ is outlined as follows: The facility failed to maintain the facility at a safe temperature range of 71 to 81°F for 116…

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

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Actual harm · Gcited before2025-06-12 · 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, staff interviews, record review, and a review of the facility's policy titled, Care Plans, the facility failed to develop a care plan for one resident(R) (R51) related to wound care for one of 31 sampled residents. Actual Harm was identified on March 21, 2025, when R51 sustained a pressure ulcer to the left ankle due to the facility not conducting routine skin checks while wearing a wander guard. Findings included: Review of the policies titled, Care Plans, revised 7/27/2023, indicated under section, admission Comprehensive Plan of Care - 3. The comprehensive person -centered care plan is developed to include measurable goals and time frames to meet a patient/resident's medical, nursing and psychosocial needs the services that are to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment . Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], revealed that the resident had a…

    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 · Past Non-Compliance
  • Actual harm · G2025-06-12 · 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, staff interviews, record reviews, and review of the facility policy titled, Wound Observation and Assessment Documentation, the facility failed to perform consistent weekly skin assessments and failed to follow up on identified skin issues for one resident (R) (R51) of thirteen residents. Actual Harm was identified to have occurred on March 21, 2025, when R51 sustained a pressure ulcer to the left ankle due to the facility not conducting routine skin checks while wearing a wander guard. Findings include: A review of the policies titled, Wound Observation and Assessment Documentation, revised 06/14/2024, revealed under section, 13. Documentation Form - Document wound assessment/observation utilizing the wound management system/events/observations using the Electronic Health Record. Daily documentation is required unless a change is noted then documentation will be completed in the womb manager dot room assessment and documentation is completed weekly and when there is significant change was…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-12 · tag F0554 — isolated
    Allow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
    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, staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility's policy titled, Medication Administration: General Guidelines, the facility failed to adequately assess one of 31 Residents (R) (R269) for self-administration of medication. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Medication Administration: General Guidelines with a revised date of 4/10/2019 documented Under the section Procedure: (3) Patients/residents are allowed to self-administration medications when specifically authorized by the attending physician and in accordance with procedures for self-administration of medications. 1. R269 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of but not limited to vascular dementia with agitation, cognitive communication deficit, and depression. Review of R269 Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 10 indicating moderate cognitive impairments. Review of the care plan revealed R269 was not…

    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 before2025-06-12 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and review of the facility policy titled, Infection Control-Housekeeping Services the facility failed to ensure three of 18 rooms (Rm 306, 307, and 308) on the 300 Hall Packaged Terminal Air Conditioner (PTAC) units air filters were free or dirt and debris. The deficient practice had the probability of diminishing the air quality for the residents residing in rooms 306, 307 and 308. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Infection Control-Housekeeping Services revised date 10/16/2023 revealed under Policy Statement: It is the policy of this facility to ensure housekeeping services will be performed on a routine and consistent basis to ensure an orderly, sanitary, and comfortable environment. Observation on 6/10/2025 at 11:57 am in room [ROOM NUMBER]B revealed the PTAC unit had brownish material with debris and dark colored build up noted on the control board, the vent filters were covered with brownish and black substances. Observation on 6/10/2025 at 12:10 pm…

    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 before2025-06-12 · 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, staff interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure the bilevel positive airway pressure, (BiPAP) was properly stored in a manner to prevent contamination for one of 19 residents (R) (R54). The deficient practice had the potential to increase the risk of respiratory infection. Findings include: Review of the medical record for R54 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility with a diagnosis of but not limited to sleep apnea (sleep disorder characterized by repeated pauses in breathing), shortness of breath, and acute upper respiratory infection. Review of the most recent Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed R54 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 14 indicating little to no cognitive impairment. Further review in Section O (Special Treatments, Procedures, and Programs) stated R54 is on respiratory therapy. Review of care plan documented R54 has a diagnosis of sleep apnea and uses a BiPAP machine. Review of the Physician's Orders…

    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 · Fcited before2024-01-04 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, staff interviews, record reviews, review of the facility's policy titled, Covid-19 Isolation and Cohorting Process, and review of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Interim Infection Prevention and Control Recommendations for Healthcare Personnel During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic the facility failed to follow droplet transmission-based precautions procedures prior to entering and exiting Covid positive resident rooms on one of four halls. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Covid-19 Isolation and Cohorting Process dated 11/13/2023 under the section titled, Entering or Exiting Confirmed Positive or Suspected of COVID-19 Infection room revealed 6) N95 Masks and eye protection must be changed to appropriate mask (and eye protection), if indicated, after exiting a room on Transmission-Based Precautions. Review of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Interim Infection Prevention and Control Recommendations for…

    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 · Dcited before2024-01-04 · tag F0554 — isolated
    Allow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
    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 and staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility's policy titled, Self-Administration of Medications by Patients/Residents, the facility failed to assess and obtain a physician order for one of 29 sampled Residents (R) (R75) to safely self-administer and store nebulizer treatments at bedside. This failure had the potential for medication error and to alter the effectiveness of the medication. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Self-Administration of Medications by Patients/Residents dated 12/2/2022 under the Policy Statement revealed, Each patient/resident who desires to self-administer medication is permitted to do so if the healthcare center's Licensed Nurse and Physician have determined that the practice would be safe for that patient/resident and other patients/residents of the healthcare center. Under the section titled Procedure revealed, 1. The opportunity to self-administer medications is reviewed during the routine assessment by 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 Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-01-04 · tag F0622 — isolated
    Not transfer or discharge a resident without an adequate reason; and must provide documentation and convey specific information when a resident is transferred or discharged.
    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 staff interviews, record review, and review of facility's policy titled, Refusal of Care Against Medical Advice, the facility failed to document the risks and benefits of remaining at the facility, and notification of the physician at the time of discharge for one of 29 sampled Residents (R) (R116) that discharged from the facility Against Medical Advice (AMA). Findings included: Review of the facility's policy titled Refusal of Care Against Medical Advice dated 11/29/2022 revealed, in Section Five (5) Determine Capacity the following: (a) In the event a resident refuses treatment, medication, or services that may maintain, save, prolong, or terminate his/her life, an assessment of decision-making capacity shall be performed. (b) A physician must personally examine the resident to determine if they lack sufficient capacity to make significant decisions regarding their medical treatment or the ability to communicate by any means such decisions. (c) . The physician's findings must be documented using 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 Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-01-04 · 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 staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility's policy titled, Care Plan, the facility failed to ensure that a care plan was developed for one of 29 sampled Residents (R) (R568) reviewed for limitation in range of motion and Activities of Daily Living (ADL) deficits. This failure had the potential for the resident not to receive treatment and care according to her needs. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Care Plan dated 7/27/2023 Policy Statement revealed, It is the policy of the health care center for each patient/resident to have a person-centered baseline care plan followed by a comprehensive care plan developed following completion of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) and Care Area Assessment (CAA) portions of the comprehensive assessment according to the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Manual and the patient/resident choice. Under section titled, admission Comprehensive Plan of Care revealed, .3. The comprehensive person-centered care plan is developed to include…

    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 · D2024-01-04 · 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 observations, resident and staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility's policy titled Care Plans, the facility failed to revise the comprehensive care plan as needed related to self-administration of nebulizer treatments for one of 29 sampled Residents (R) (R75) following a hospital stay. This failure had the potential for the resident not to receive treatment and care according to her needs. Findings include: A review of the facility's policy titled Care Plans, dated 7/27/2023 under section titled, Care Plan Review and Update revealed, 1. Comprehensive care plans should be reviewed not less than quarterly according to the OBRA MDS schedule, following the completion of the assessment. Care plan updates/reviews will be performed within 7 days of each quarterly assessment, each acute change in condition, and as needed following each hospital stay 4. Care plans will be updated by nurses, Case Mix Directors (CMD), or any other interdisciplinary team member so that the care plan will reflect…

    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 · D2024-01-04 · 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, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of 29 sampled Residents (R) (R568) reviewed for limited range of motion received passive range of motion exercises as needed to address limited range of motion in her bilateral upper extremities. This failure created a potential for worsening contracture (fixed resistance to passive stretch), pain, or skin breakdown. Findings include: During an observation and interview on 1/2/2024 at 11:28 am revealed Family of R568 performed Passive Range of Motion (PROM) exercises to R568's bilateral arms and hands, then placed a rolled washcloth into both hands. The Family of R568 stated after R568's stroke, the staff at the hospital expressed how important it was for her to receive exercises to prevent her arms and hands from contracture. Further interview with the Family of R568 revealed the facility staff did not provide exercises. During an observation on 1/3/2024 at 11:55 am revealed, R568 lying in bed with a hand roll intact to her…

    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 · Ecited before2022-06-16 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — pattern
    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 policy review, the facility failed to implement/develop care plans for four residents (R) (R#64, R#69, R#96, and R#100) of 41 sampled residents. Specifically, not implementing care plan related to oxygen administration for R#64, R#69, and R#100; and not developing care plan for R#96 for self-administration of medications. Findings include: Review of facility policy titled, Care Plans, revised 7/21/21, revealed the comprehensive person-centered care plan is developed to include measurable goals and timeframe's to meet a patient/resident's medical, nursing, and psychosocial needs, the services that are to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment. 1. A review of the clinical record for R#64 revealed resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of but not limited to subarachnoid hemorrhage, acute respiratory failure, sepsis,…

    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
Show the remaining 5 citations
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-06-16 · tag F0554 — isolated
    Allow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
    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 policy review titled Resident Independent Self-Administration and Medication Assistance of Medication, the facility failed to ensure one of 41 sampled residents (R) (R#96) had a physician's order for self-administration of respiratory medications prior to nebulizer medications being kept at bedside and self-administered by resident. Findings include: Review of facility policy titled, Resident Independent Self-Administration and Medication Assistance of Medication, dated 8/1/12, revealed self-administering of medications by a resident is permitted only: upon specific written orders of the physician or other authorized healthcare provider, obtained on a semi-annual basis. A review of the clinical record for R#96 revealed resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of but not limited to congestive heart failure (CHF), respiratory disease, hypertension (HTN), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Observation and interview on 6/12/22…

    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 · D2022-06-16 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, interviews, and review of the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI,) the facility failed to ensure the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment accurately reflected the resident's status for two of 41 sampled residents (R) (R#46 and R#64). Findings include: 1. Review of the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) section J1800 revealed code one, yes: if the resident has fallen since the last assessment, proceed to section J1900. A review of the clinical record for R#46 revealed resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of but not limited to chronic systolic heart failure, ventricular tachycardia, cerebral vascular accident (CVA) with left hemiparesis, diabetes, and chronic kidney disease. Review of R#46's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 4/11/22 revealed R#46 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 12 out of 15, indicating the resident had moderate cognitive impairment. Further review under section J1800, indicated 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
  • Potential for harm · D2022-06-16 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, record reviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure medications were administered as ordered for one of 41 sampled residents (R) (R#323). Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Medication and Treatment Administration Guidelines dated 3/18 revealed medications and treatments administered immediately following administration or per state specific standards .medications not administered according to medical practitioner's orders are reported to the attending medical practitioner and documented in the clinical record including the name and dose of the medication and reason the medication was not administered .The licensed nurse is responsible for validating documentation is completed for any medication administered during the shift .vital signs are taken and recorded prior to the administration of vital sign dependent medications in accordance with medical practitioner's orders . A review of the clinical record for R#323 revealed resident 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 · D2022-06-16 · 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, interviews, record reviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure that three residents (R) (R#64, R#69, and R#100) of 11 residents that had tracheostomies with oxygen masks, received the correct physician ordered oxygen concentration. Findings Include: Review of the facility's policy titled Oxygen Administration dated 11/22/21, revealed the policy of [facility name] is to provide oxygen safely and accurately to appropriate patients .Oxygen will be administered by licensed personnel only when ordered by the physician, physician assistant (PA), or Nurse Practitioner (NP). 1. A review of the clinical record for R#64 revealed resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of but not limited to subarachnoid hemorrhage, acute respiratory failure, sepsis, and cardiac arrest. Review of R#64's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 4/26/22 revealed the residents Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) was not completed due 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-06-16 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
    Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to maintain complete and accurately documented medical records for three of six residents (R) (R#87, R#26, R#47) records reviewed related to advance directives. Specifically, R#87 and R#26's code status levels were listed as Do Not Resuscitate (DNR); however, the physician orders indicated Full Code and R#47's code status was listed as Full Code and the physician orders indicated DNR. Findings include: 1. Review of the clinical record for R#87 revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including end stage renal disease (ESRD), diabetes, heart failure, hypertension (HTN) and cerebral vascular accident (CVA) with left side hemiparesis. Further review of the clinical record revealed R#87 is currently listed as a do not resuscitate (DNR). Review of R#87's General Order dated [DATE] revealed under other description her Code Status listed as full code. Review of R#87's care plan dated [DATE] revealed category Advanced Directives Code…

    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

“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

$8,788 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $8,788 — penalty dated 2025-06-12

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

Part of a chain

This home belongs to PRUITTHEALTH — 95 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 3 of 52.9+0.1 vs chain
Health inspection 3 of 52.8+0.2 vs chain
Staffing 2 of 52.5-0.5 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 53.6+0.4 vs chain
The other 94 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.9★, per CMS)
1 of 5Oaks - Athens Skilled Nursing, TheAthens, GA 1 of 5PruittHealth - Holly Hill, LLCValdosta, GA 1 of 5PruittHealth - LilburnLilburn, GA 1 of 5PruittHealth- AikenAiken, SC 1 of 5PruittHealth- ColumbiaColumbia, SC 1 of 5PruittHealth- Rock HillRock Hill, SC 1 of 5PruittHealth-Carolina PointDurham, NC 1 of 5PruittHealth-DurhamDurham, NC 1 of 5PruittHealth-TrentNew Bern, NC 1 of 5PruittHealth-Union PointeMonroe, NC 1 of 5Pruitthealth - AustellAustell, GA 1 of 5Pruitthealth - Lakehaven, LLCValdosta, GA 1 of 5Pruitthealth - MaconMacon, GA 1 of 5Pruitthealth - Magnolia ManorMoultrie, GA 1 of 5Pruitthealth - Old CapitolLouisville, GA 1 of 5Pruitthealth - PalmyraAlbany, GA 1 of 5Pruitthealth - SwainsboroSwainsboro, GA 1 of 5Pruitthealth - ToccoaToccoa, GA 1 of 5Pruitthealth - West AtlantaAtlanta, GA 2 of 5NC State Veterans Home-KinstonKinston, NC 2 of 5PruittHealth - AugustaAugusta, GA 2 of 5PruittHealth- BambergBamberg, SC 2 of 5PruittHealth- DillonDillon, SC 2 of 5PruittHealth- EstillEstill, SC 2 of 5PruittHealth- Moncks CornerMoncks Corner, SC 2 of 5PruittHealth- RidgewayRidgeway, SC 2 of 5PruittHealth-NeuseNew Bern, NC 2 of 5Pruitthealth - BrookhavenAtlanta, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth - CreeksideAugusta, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth - DecaturDecatur, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth - FairburnFairburn, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth - Fleming IslandFleming Island, FL 2 of 5Pruitthealth - ForsythForsyth, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth - GriffinGriffin, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth - Richmond, LLCAugusta, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth - RomeRome, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth - SavannahSavannah, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth - Valdosta, LLCValdosta, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth-North Tampa, LLCLutz, FL 2 of 5The Oaks-BrevardBrevard, NC

Showing 40 of 94; lowest-rated first.

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

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
GRANT, ANTHONYIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 12/29/2019
PRUITT, NEILIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 02/03/2015

CMS files one row per role, so the 3 rows in the source record cover these 2 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

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.

$12.7M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-10.8%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$3.4M
Related-party expense24% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 73%Medicare 4%Other / private 22%

About 73% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $3.4M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 24% 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

$330per resident / day
operating cost
$10,030per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$298per 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 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 115531. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-06-12, 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