Calhoun Crossing Of Journey LLC

Location & what’s nearby

Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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.

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.

41.8% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 52 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 48.0% 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 50 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 0.19 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 19% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 56% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy at close to weekday levels right through the weekend. 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 100 beds and averages 89.1 residents a day — about 89% occupied, or roughly 11 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 3.08 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.30 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.08 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.83 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.18 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.28 to 0.33 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 53% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

Deficiencies are 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.

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.

34 citations, most serious first. The 14 most serious are shown; the remaining 20 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · G2024-08-28 · 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 observation, record review, interview, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to implement a person-centered comprehensive plan of care with measurable goals and plans related to fall prevention for three of 22 sampled residents (R31, R47, and R10). Harm was identified to have occurred on 07/18/24 when the facility failed to develop and implement a care plan for R31 that addressed his desire for more independence with ambulation and his desire for bilateral prostheses. (Cross reference F657, F689 and F688) Findings included: Review of facility policy titled Comprehensive Care Plans undated indicated . It is the policy of this facility 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 psychosocial needs that are identified in the resident's comprehensive assessment. The comprehensive care plan will describe, at 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 · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Actual harm · G2024-08-28 · 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 record review, staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide appropriate adaptive equipment as directed by Physical Therapy recommendation for one of 22 sampled residents (R) (R31) related to a bi-lateral prosthesis to prevent further potential decline in muscle strength, joint mobility, and an ability to ambulate independently. Psychosocial harm was determined to exist on 7/18/24 due to R31's emotional state when he repeatedly expressed his need for the prosthesis to promote his independence. (Cross Reference F656) Findings included: A review of a facility's policy titled Reporting of Therapy Services dated 02/12/22 indicated . Specialized rehabilitative services (physical therapy, occupational therapy, speech-language pathology services) are provided as indicated to ensure the needs of the residents are met in accordance with their comprehensive plan of care. This policy addresses how the facility reports what rehabilitative services were provided. A review of R31's…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Actual harm · G2024-08-28 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  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 facility policy review, the facility failed to prevent a fall for two of three residents (R) (R10 and R47) reviewed for falls. This failure resulted in harm to R10 when the nursing assistant failed to provide incontinence care with the assistance of another staff member per the care plan; R10 fell off the bed and suffered a closed head injury, laceration to the forehead, and fracture of the fifth finger on the right hand. Findings included: 1. A review of R10's undated admission Record located in the Profile tab of the electronic medical record (EMR) revealed R10 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting right dominant side, and morbid obesity due to excess calories. A review of R10's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) located in the MDS tab of the EMR with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 02/14/24, indicated a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 10 out…

  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
• Actual harm · G2023-03-16 · 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 policy review, the facility failed to ensure one (Resident (R) 87) of two residents reviewed for abuse was free from physical abuse. Actual harm occurred on 2/4/2023 when R87 sustained a contusion to the scalp, left shoulder, and left knee after R300 attacked him in the common area. Findings include: Review of the facility-provided policy titled Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation, dated 2/1/2022, revealed, It is the policy of this facility to provide protections for the health, welfare and rights of each resident by developing and implementing written policies and procedures that prohibit and prevent abuse, neglect, exploitation and misappropriation of resident property . Definitions: . Abuse, means the willful infliction of injury, unreasonable confinement, intimidation, or punishment with resulting physical harm, pain or mental anguish, which can include staff to resident abuse and certain resident to resident altercations. Physical Abuse includes, but is 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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-03-29 · 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

  Based on record review, staff interview, and review of the facility policy titled Use of Psychotropic Medication(s), the facility failed to ensure a stop date was implemented, not to exceed 14 days, for psychotropic medications administered to one resident (R) (R84) from a sample of 33 residents. The deficient practice increased the risk of adverse clinical outcomes. Findings include:A review of the facility policy Use of Psychotropic Medication(s), dated 03/20/2025, documented as needed (PRN) orders for psychotropic medications would require the prescriber to specify a duration over 14 days with a clinical rationale. Per the policy, psychotropic orders would require a set duration time and could not be renewed for longer than 14 days without a direct evaluation of the patient by the prescriber.A review of the physician (MD) orders dated 10/23/2025, revealed the MD ordered lorazepam injection solution 2 mg/ml {milligrams per milliliter} intramuscularly every 12 hours as needed. There was no stop date for the order.A review of the pharmacist's consultation report dated 12/22/2025,…

  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 · Fcited before2024-08-28 · tag F0865 — failed to run a quality-improvement (QAPI) program — widespread
  Have a plan that describes the process for conducting QAPI and QAA activities.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interviews and review of facility documentation, the facility failed to ensure a Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) plan was developed to drive quality assurance (QA) measures that addressed resident care and safety, quality of life, and resident choice. This failure had the potential to affect all 91 residents who currently lived in the facility. Findings included: A review of a document provided by the facility titled Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) Plan, dated 2022 prepared by Compliance Store, indicated . Introduction . The QAPI Plan of [Facility Name] is designed to establish and maintain an organized facility-wide program that is data-driven and utilizes a proactive approach to improving the quality of care and services throughout the facility. This is a living document that will continue to be refined and revisited. It is written in accordance with the Facility's vision and mission statement. Objectives of the QAPI plan include . Establish a facility-wide process to identify opportunities for improvement through continuous attention 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.

  Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-08-28 · tag F0582 — pattern
  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 interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide Form CMS-10055 (Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services) Skilled Nursing Facility Advance Beneficiary Notice (SNFABN) to two of three residents (R) (R145 and R146) reviewed for liability notices. This failure prevented the resident or responsible party the ability to make an informed decision related to the cost of continued therapy services. Findings included: A review of the CMS site, Form Instructions Advance Beneficiary Notice of Non-coverage (ABN) OMB Approval Number: 0938-0566 accessed at https://www.cms.gov/medicare/medicare-general-information/bni/downloads/abn-form-instructions.pdf on 06/04/24 revealed, The beneficiary or his or her representative must choose only one of the three options listed in Blank (G). Unless otherwise instructed to do so according to the specific guidance provided in these instructions, the notifier must not decide for the beneficiary which of the 3 checkboxes to select . If 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 · Ecited before2024-08-28 · tag F0623 — pattern
  Provide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy, record review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure notice regarding the reason for the transfer was provided, in writing for three of three residents (R) (R64, R70, and R94) reviewed for hospitalization. This failure created the potential for the residents to be uninformed about their rights related to hospital transfer and subsequent return to the facility. Findings included: The facility's policy regarding written notice of hospital transfer was requested on 08/27/24. During an interview conducted with the Administrator and the Director of Nursing (DON) on 06/28/25 at 9:25 AM, the DON confirmed the facility did not have a policy regarding written notification with hospital transfer and stated her expectation was federal regulation would be followed related to hospital transfers. 1. A review of the electronic medical record (EMR) for R64 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including type 2 diabetes and a history of heart attack.…

  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 · E2024-08-28 · tag F0645 — pattern
  PASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
  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 facility policy review, the facility failed to complete Pre-admission Screening and Resident Reviews (PASARR) as required for two of three sampled residents (R) (R31 and R64) reviewed for PASARR status. Findings included: A review of a policy titled, Resident Assessment - Coordination with PASARR Program dated 02/12/22 indicated . The facility will only admit individuals with a mental disorder or intellectual disability whom the State mental health or intellectual disability authority has determined as appropriate for admission. The Social Services Director shall be responsible for keeping track of each resident's PASARR screening status, and referring to the appropriate authority. There was no evidence in the facility policy that addressed the facility's responsibility if the PASARR was inaccurate. 1. A review of R31's electronic medical records (EMR) titled admission Record located under the Profile tab indicated the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. 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 · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-08-28 · tag F0847 — pattern
  Inform resident or representatives choice to enter into binding arbitration agreement and right to refuse.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to contain specific language in the facility's arbitration agreement for two of three sampled residents (R) (R86 and R84) reviewed for an arbitration agreement. Findings included: A review of a facility document titled Resident and Family Arbitration Agreement revealed no evidence that expressly stated that the resident/family was not required to sign the agreement as a condition of admission or to continue to receive care at the facility. 1. A review of R86's electronic medical record (EMR) titled admission Record indicated the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A review of a document provided by the facility titled Resident and Family Arbitration Agreement dated 01/31/24, indicated R86 signed the agreement. The document did not expressly state that the resident/family was not required to sign the agreement as a condition of admission or to continue to receive care at the facility. A review of R86's EMR titled admission Minimum Data Set…

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

  Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-08-28 · tag F0567 — failed to protect residents' money held by the home — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to manage his or her financial affairs.
  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 staff and resident interviews, the facility failed to ensure the timely availability of personal resident funds for three of eight residents (R) (R3, R31, and R37) reviewed for access to their funds. The facility's banking hours were limited to Monday through Friday from 9:00 AM to 3:00 PM and residents did not have access to their money outside of these hours. Findings included: The facility's banking hours, posted on the Business Office Door at the facility entrance, indicated the facility's banking hours were Monday through Friday from 9:00 AM to 3:00 PM. The sign indicated there were no banking hours on the weekend. 1. A review of R3's admission Record, dated 08/27/24 and found in the electronic medical record (EMR) under the Profile Tab, revealed R3 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including heart failure and end-stage renal disease (ESRD). A review of R3's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 05/22/24 and found in the EMR…

  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 · D2024-08-28 · tag F0568 — isolated
  Properly hold, secure, and manage each resident's personal money which is deposited with the nursing home.
  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 facility policy, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure accurate financial accounting and record retention for two of eight residents (R) (R31 and R37) reviewed for resident funds. Findings included: A review of the facility's policy titled, Resident Trust Policy updated on 08/27/24, indicated, Calhoun Health Care maintains a resident trust that is available, free of charge, for any long-or-short-term resident. The facility will hold, safeguard, manage, and account for the personal trust account; and 4. The resident shall have reasonable access, upon request, to their transaction records and shall receive an itemized quarterly statement of his/her accounts.? 1. A review of R31's admission Record, dated 08/27/24 and found in the electronic medical record (EMR) under the Profile Tab, revealed R31 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including type 2 diabetes and dependence on renal dialysis. A review of R31's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference…

  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 · D2024-08-28 · tag F0569 — isolated
  Notify each resident of certain balances and convey resident funds upon discharge, eviction, or death.
  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 and record review, the facility failed to ensure resident funds managed by the facility in a Personal Needs (PN) Account were released to the resident or resident's Responsible Party (RP) within 30 days of discharge for three of eight residents (R) (R195, R197, and R199) reviewed for personal funds. Findings included: 1. A review of R195's admission Record, dated 08/27/24 and found in the electronic medical record (EMR) under the Profile Tab, revealed R195 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Alzheimer's Disease and acute and chronic respiratory failure. The record indicated the resident passed away in the facility on 07/21/23. A review of R195's Resident Fund Statement, dated 08/28/24 and provided by the facility, indicated the resident still had an active PN Account as of that date (more than 13 months after the resident's discharge from the facility). The document revealed a total balance of $4882.92 was still in the resident's PN account as of 08/28/24. 2.…

  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 · D2024-08-28 · tag F0625 — isolated
  Notify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff interviews, and facility policy, the facility failed to ensure the facility's Bed Hold Policy was provided in writing to three of three residents (R) (R64, R70, and R94) reviewed for hospitalization. This failure created the potential for the residents to be uninformed about their rights related to the facility's bedhold procedures. Findings included: A review of the facility's policy titled, Bed Hold Prior to Transfer Policy dated 2023, indicated, It is the policy of this facility to provide written information to the resident and/or the resident representative regarding bed hold policies prior to transferring a resident to the hospital or the resident goes on therapeutic leave; and The facility will provide written information about these policies to residents and/or resident representatives prior to and upon transfer for such absences. 1. A review of R64's admission Record, dated 08/27/24 and found in the electronic medical record (EMR) under the Profile tab, revealed 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

“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.

Fines & penalties

$107,867 in federal fines across 7 penalties.

• $69,934 — penalty dated 2024-08-28
• $4,938 — penalty dated 2024-02-20
• $4,938 — penalty dated 2024-02-12
• $13,674 — penalty dated 2024-01-22
• $3,798 — penalty dated 2024-01-08
• $3,176 — penalty dated 2024-01-02
• $7,409 — penalty dated 2023-12-11

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 JOURNEY HEALTHCARE — 32 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 →

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

CMS files one row per role, so the 42 rows in the source record cover these 24 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.

10 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.

About 77% 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 $469K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. 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 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in GA