Carrollton Manor, Incorporated
2455 Oak Grove Church Road, Carrollton, GA 30117 · For profit - Corporation · 100 certified beds · (770) 834-1737 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- CMS has flagged it for abuse
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Apr 2026
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607, F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has 2 actual-harm citations
- a high number of inspection citations overall (38) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (1/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 1 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 1 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 1 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 1 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 1 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 25.5% | 15.3% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 3.7% | 5.6% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 5.1% | 0.9% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 16.4% | 2.5% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 1.7% | 11.3% | 6.5% | better |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 6.6% | 0.1% | 0.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 9.4% | 3.2% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 20.2% | 15.2% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 34.5% | 20.5% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 57.6% | 95.0% | 95.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 2.4% | 5.6% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 21.7% | 15.8% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 25.0% | 19.9% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 2.5% | 2.6% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 57.1% | 78.4% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 39.4% | 25.0% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 22.4% | 11.6% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 5.27 | 2.15 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 5.57 | 1.90 | 1.80 | worse |
§ 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.
49.0% 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 89 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 43.9% 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 57 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.28 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 42% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 4% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at 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.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 49.0%CMS range 37.1–59.8 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.7%CMS range 6.8–13.8 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 43.9% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 42.1% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 43.9% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 95.5% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 88.9% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 85.7% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 3.4% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 9.4%CMS range 6.2–13.8 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.23 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 100 beds and averages 85.4 residents a day — about 85% occupied, or roughly 15 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 3.89 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.23 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.50 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.44 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.07 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.24 to 0.19 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 50% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
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.
38 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 26 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · G2026-04-25 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect 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 record review, interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to protect the residents' right to be free from physical and/or verbal abuse by two residents (R) (101 and R70) of the five of eleven residents R89, R102, R103, R57, and R90 reviewed for abuse. The facility's failure to ensure residents were protected from abuse resulted in actual physical harm to R89, R102, and R103, and created the potential for other residents in the facility to experience physical and/or psychological abuse. Findings include: 1. Review of R101's admission Record, located in the electronic medical record (EMR) under the Profile tab revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident's diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease. R101 was discharged from the facility on a psychiatric hold on 04/06/26 and was not residing in the facility during the survey. A. Review of R101's Progress Notes, dated 07/03/25 and found in the EMR under the Notes tab, revealed, SSD [Social Services Director] was notified of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Actual harm · G2026-04-25 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide 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, record review, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to implement pressure ulcer prevention measures and timely treatment and interventions for one of four residents (Resident (R) 28) reviewed for pressure ulcers. This failure contributed to the development and subsequent decline of a potentially avoidable stage III pressure ulcer on R28's sacrum. Actual harm was identified to have occurred on 04/20/2026 when R28 was noted to have developed a Stage III pressure ulcer to the sacrum after interventions to prevent pressure ulcers were not implemented in a timely manner. Findings include:Review of R28's admission Record, located under the Profile tab of the electronic medical record (EMR), revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including vascular dementia and anoxic brain damage. Review of R28's Clinical admission note dated 04/09/2026 and located under the Progress Notes tab of the EMR revealed, Skin: Poor skin tugor [sic]. Edema to bilateral…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2026-04-25 · tag F0628 — widespreadProvide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
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 and family interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a written notice of transfer and/or a written bed hold notice was initiated on four of four residents (R) (R1, R9, R3, and R10) reviewed for facility-initiated emergent transfer to the hospital. This failure had the potential to contribute to the possibility for denial of re-admission and loss of the resident's home following hospitalization.Findings include:1. Review of R1's admission Record from the electronic medical record (EMR) Profile tab revealed an admission date of 08/09/2024, readmission on [DATE], with medical diagnoses that included paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, acute and chronic respiratory failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), type II diabetes, heart failure, Alzheimer's disease, chronic kidney disease (CKD), congestive heart failure (CHF), and pancreatitis. Review of R1's EMR Progress Notes tab revealed on 04/11/2026 at 7:12 PM, R1 had been experiencing multiple…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2026-04-25 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — widespreadEnsure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on document review, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure the menus were developed to meet residents' nutritional needs by failing to indicate portion sizes for all 86 facility residents and failing to indicate substitutions for omitted foods. This failure had the potential to lead to weight loss, malnutrition, or dissatisfaction with meals for all residents.Findings include: Review of the weekly menu, provided on paper by the Dietary Supervisor (DS), revealed it contained a mix of typed and handwritten entries for breakfast, lunch, and dinner, with instructions such as no bread for the soft/bite-sized diet and omit bacon/sausage for the NAS [no added salt] diet, with no substitutions listed of similar nutritive value. There were no portion sizes or serving instructions on the menu. During an interview on 04/21/26 at 9:30 AM, the DS stated she did not have a menu that included portion sizes or any documentation of how much of each food item to serve and adaptations for each mechanically altered texture or therapeutic diet. The DS stated she has…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2026-04-25 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure that food stored in the kitchen pantry, refrigerators, and freezer was appropriately labeled and dated, covered, and maintained at proper temperature. Additionally, the facility failed to ensure the vents above the stove, ceiling lights, air vents, and standing fans in the kitchen were clean. These failures had the potential to increase the risk of foodborne illness and infection among all 86 facility residents.Findings include: During initial observations of the kitchen on 04/21/2026 at 9:30 AM, along with the Dietary Supervisor (DS), the following was observed:1. In the juice cooler behind the tray line, three large boxes of thawed nutritional beverages were observed without a date indicating when they were thawed. The nutritional beverage cartons indicated the product should be used within 14 days of thawing. The DS confirmed there was no thaw date on the boxes of the nutritional beverages and stated she had never thought about it before, but the staff would not have a way of knowing how…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2026-04-25 · tag F0865 — failed to run a quality-improvement (QAPI) program — widespreadHave 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 staff interviews, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to identify issues prior to their identification by the survey team and failed to implement and maintain an effective, ongoing Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) program that addressed identified concerns and ensured corrective actions were implemented and sustained. Specifically, the facility was unable to provide any Performance Improvement Plans (PIPs) completed in the last year and failed to address ongoing physical and verbal abuse by one resident toward other residents, allowing the abuse to continue.Findings include: Review of the facility documentation indicated QAPI meetings were held, but there was no data/trending, no root cause analysis for problems identified, no interventions started, no sustained improvements, and no meaningful action. Documentation was not provided for PIPs that included the systems and tools to identify, collect, and evaluate data from all departments to monitor performance indicators, including self-assessment tools, data collection tools, and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2026-04-25 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide 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 record review, observations, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to develop a documented water management plan that included an assessment to identify where Legionella and other waterborne pathogens could grow and spread and what control measures were in place, and the facility failed to implement a program of enhanced barrier precautions (EBP) to assist in the prevention of cross contamination for residents with areas of risk. Specifically, appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) was not worn for one resident (Resident (R) 3) during high contact care, hand hygiene was not performed during a tube feeding for R28, and signage on the door for R88 was not clear as to the procedures for contact isolation for visitors. These failures had the potential to affect all residents in the facility. Findings include: 1. During an interview on 04/23/26 at 8:55 AM, the Administrator advised that the facility did not have a Legionella water program. During an interview on 04/25/26 at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2026-04-25 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — widespreadImplement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on facility document review, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure an antibiotic stewardship program was developed and implemented. This failure had the potential to increase the risk of adverse events, including the development of antibiotic-resistant organisms (commonly called superbugs) from unnecessary or inappropriate antibiotic use for all 86 residents currently residing in the facility. Findings include: Review of the last three months of tracking/trending infections document provided by the facility revealed there was no documentation of whether an infection met any defined criteria for infection and antibiotic treatment, or if the antibiotic prescribed was effective for any identified organisms. During an interview on 04/25/26 at 11:42 AM, the Infection Preventionist (IP) stated he was in charge of the antibiotic stewardship program, but did not receive a monthly report of antibiotic use and just found out last week during a training that the facility should be using McGeers criteria (standardized surveillance definitions used 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.
- Potential for harm · F2026-04-25 · tag F0909 — failed to maintain a comfortable temperature — widespreadRegularly inspect all bed frames, mattresses, and bed rails (if any) for safety; and all bed rails and mattresses must attach safely to the bed frame.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interviews, review of Manufacturer's Instructions for Use (MIFU), and policy review, the facility failed to ensure bed frames, mattresses, and bed rails were inspected and maintained per the MIFU for six of six residents (Resident (R) 2, R5, R24, R28, R33, and R57) reviewed for bed rail use. This deficient practice has the potential for bed malfunction, failure, or entrapment, which could lead to resident injury.Findings include: 1. During observations on 04/21/26 at 12:18 PM and on 04/22/26 at 9:25 AM, it was revealed that R2 had bilateral upper (the head of the bed area) bed rails. 2. During an observation on 04/21/26 at 2:55 PM, it was revealed that R5 had bilateral upper bed rails. 3. During an observation on 04/21/26 at 3:08 PM, it was revealed that R24 had a rail in the middle section of the bed and one bed rail up towards the head of the bed. 4. During an observation on 04/21/26, at 11:11 AM in R28's room, she was observed lying in bed. R28 was unresponsive to questions or to verbal/tactile stimuli. She was not observed to move on her own. There…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2026-04-25 · tag F0944 — widespreadConduct mandatory training, for all staff, on the facility’s Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement Program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interviews, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure five of five Certified Nurse Aides (Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) 1, CNA2, CNA3, CNA4, and CNA5) reviewed for training received annual training to review the facility's Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) Program. This failure created a potential for staff to be unaware of their role in the facility's QAPI program and how to communicate their concerns, problems, or opportunities for improvement to the facility's QAPI committee.Findings include: 1. Review of CNA1's personnel file revealed a hire date of 03/16/23. Review of CNA1's User Learning transcript from 03/16/25 to 04/24/26 and provided on paper by the Director of Nursing (DON) revealed no training on the facility's QAPI program elements and goals, and the staff's role in QAPI. 2. Review of CNA2's personnel file revealed a hire date of 01/13/22. Review of CNA2's User Learning transcript dated 04/24/26 and provided on paper by the DON revealed no training on the facility's QAPI program elements and goals, and the staff's role in…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-04-25 · tag F0730 — patternObserve each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on document review and staff interview, the facility failed to complete an annual performance review for four of four Certified Nurse Aides (Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) 2, CNA3, CNA4, and CNA5) reviewed who were employed by the facility for more than one year. This failure had the potential for missed identification of performance problems, unsafe care, and missed training opportunities based on the evaluation.Findings include: 1. Review of CNA2's personnel file revealed a hire date of 01/13/22. Review of CNA2's personnel file provided by the DON did not have documentation of a performance review. 2. Review of CNA3's personnel file revealed a hire date of 03/19/20. Review of CNA3's personnel file provided by the DON did not have documentation of a performance review. 3. Review of CNA4's personnel file revealed a hire date of 06/17/98. Review of CNA4's personnel file provided by the DON did not have documentation of a performance review. 4. Review of CNA5's personnel file revealed a hire date of 08/29/24. Review of CNA5's personnel file provided by the DON did not have…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-25 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, staff interviews, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure the dining experience was dignified for one resident (R) (R56) of 34 sampled residents. The deficient practice had the potential to contribute to depression, anxiety, decreased food intake, and dissatisfaction with meals for R56.Findings include:Review of R56's admission record, located under the Profile tab of her in the electronic medical record (EMR), revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease, anxiety disorder, depression, and adjustment disorder. Review of R56's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 03/03/2026 and located under the MDS tab of the EMR revealed Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of two, indicating severely impaired cognition. The assessment further revealed frequent wandering and physical behaviors directed toward others. R56 required partial to moderate assistance with eating. Review…
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.
Show the remaining 26 citations
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-25 · tag F0552 — isolatedEnsure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
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, observations, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to provide evidence that residents and/or their representatives were informed of the risks, benefits, and available treatment options before restraints were initiated for two of seven residents reviewed for restraints (Resident (R) 21 and R56) and before psychotropic medications were initiated for four of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medication (R33, R12, R38, and R70) from a total sample of 34 residents. This deficient practice could result in residents being restrained or receiving medications without clinical necessity. Findings include: 1. Review of R21's admission Record, located under the Profile tab of her electronic medical record (EMR), revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease with behavioral disturbance, restlessness, and agitation. Review of R21's admission Packet dated 11/12/24 and provided on paper by the Director of nursing (DON) revealed 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.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-25 · tag F0582 — isolatedGive residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, document review, staff interviews, policy review, and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) guidance review, the facility failed to ensure two of three residents (R) (R24 and R90) who were reviewed for Beneficiary Notices received a CMS-10055 Skilled Nursing Facility Advanced Beneficiary Notice of Non-coverage (SNF ABN). This deficient practice had the potential for residents and/or their representatives not to be fully informed of the out-of-pocket costs associated with continuing to receive therapy after a Medicare Part A service ended. Findings Include:1. Review of R24's admission Record from the facility electronic medical record (EMR) Profile tab revealed a facility admission date of 09/17/2024, and readmission on [DATE], with medical diagnoses that included spinal stenosis, peripheral vascular disease (PVD), low back pain, altered mental status, acute pulmonary edema, and acute respiratory failure. Review of the facility provided Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC) revealed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-25 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
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 policy review, the facility failed to ensure incidents of potential resident-to-resident abuse were identified, reported, and investigated per the facility's policy for three of 11 residents (R75, R19, R101) reviewed for abuse. These failures placed the residents at risk for physical and/or psychosocial harm related to continued abuse. Cross Reference F600, F609, and F865.Findings include:1A. Review of R75's admission Record located under the Profile tab of the electronic medical record (EMR) revealed she was admitted on [DATE] and had a diagnosis of dementia with psychotic disturbance. Review of R75's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 01/19/26 and located under the MDS tab of the EMR revealed a score of three out of 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS), indicating severely impaired cognition. Review of R75's EMR under the Progress Note tab revealed a General Nurses Note dated 03/04/26 that documented, Spoke with [R75'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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-25 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
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 review of record review, document review, interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure timely reporting of allegations of abuse related to three Residents (Resident (R) 101, R75, and R19) out of eleven residents reviewed for abuse. The facility's failure to ensure potential abuse was reported timely created the potential for ongoing abuse of residents in the facility. A total of 34 residents were reviewed in the sample. Cross reference F600 Findings include:1. Review of R101's admission Record, located in the electronic medical record (EMR) under the Profile tab revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident's diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease. R101 was discharged from the facility on a psychiatric hold on 04/06/26 and was not residing in the facility at the time of the survey. A. Review of R101's Progress Notes, dated 09/20/25 and found in the EMR under the Notes tab, revealed, Resident [R101] started arguing with her [unidentified] roommate. She was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-25 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop 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, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to develop and implement care plans for four residents (Resident (R)2, R5, R24, and R70) of 34 sampled residents. Specifically, care plans were not developed for residents' use of bed rails or oxygen, and resident-to-resident abuse interventions were not included in their comprehensive care plan. This failure had the potential to affect the accuracy and complexity of resident care. Findings include:1. Review of R2's admission Record from the facility's electronic medical record (EMR) Profile tab revealed a facility admission date of 10/10/2025 with medical diagnoses that included pneumonia, asthma, protein-calorie malnutrition, chronic respiratory failure, and chronic kidney disease (CKD). During an observation on 04/21/2026 at 12:18 PM, R2's bed had bilateral upper bed rails (towards the head of the bed). During an observation on 04/22/2026 at 9:25 AM, R2 was in bed with bilateral upper rails. Review of R2's EMR Care…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-25 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — isolatedProvide activities to meet all resident's needs.
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, interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure an ongoing program of activities was provided for one of five residents reviewed for activities (Resident (R) 28), who was bedbound. This failure placed R28 at risk for isolation or lack of sensory stimulation.Findings include:Review of R28's admission Record, located under the Profile tab of the EMR, revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including vascular dementia and anoxic brain damage. During an observation on 04/21/26 at 11:11 AM in R28's room, she was observed lying in bed. R28 was not responsive to questions or verbal/tactile stimuli. R28's eyes remained closed and she was not observed to move on her own. There was no radio in her room, and the TV was not on. During an observation on 04/22/26 from 10:22 AM to 11:47 AM in R28's room, she was lying in bed with her eyes closed and was unresponsive to verbal or tactile stimuli. The TV was on; however, there was no volume. During an…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-25 · tag F0700 — isolatedTry different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
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, observations, staff interviews, review of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidance, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure assessments, including alternatives to rail usage, were attempted prior to the installation and use of bed rails for six 34 sampled residents (Resident (R) 2, R5, R24, R28, R33, and R57). This failure had the potential to increase accidental entrapment or injury.Findings include:1. Review of R2's admission Record from the facility electronic medical record (EMR) Profile tab revealed a facility admission date of 10/10/25 with medical diagnoses that included pneumonia, asthma, protein calorie malnutrition, chronic respiratory failure, and chronic kidney disease (CKD). During an observation on 04/21/26 at 12:18 PM, R2's bed had bilateral upper (towards the head of the bed) bed rails. During an observation on 04/22/26 at 9:25 AM, R2 was in bed with bilateral upper rails. Review of R2's EMR Assessment tab, Progress Notes tab, and Miscellaneous tab…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-25 · tag F0745 — failed to provide medically-related social services — isolatedProvide medically-related social services to help each resident achieve the highest possible quality of life.
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 policy review, the facility failed to provide medically-related social services to address potential psychosocial concerns and evaluate the ability to consent in sexual activities for two of three residents (Resident (R) 75 and R19) reviewed for behavioral and emotional needs. These failures had the potential to contribute to ongoing psychosocial distress following an incident of potential sexual abuse.Findings include:1. Review of R75's admission Record located under the Profile tab of the electronic medical record (EMR) revealed she was admitted on [DATE] and had a diagnosis of dementia with psychotic disturbance. Review of R75's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 01/19/26 and located under the MDS tab of the EMR revealed a score of three out of 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS), indicating severely impaired cognition. Review of R75's EMR under the Progress Note tab revealed a General Nurses Note dated 03/04/26…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-25 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate was less than five percent during medication administration review. Five errors were identified from 31 opportunities involving three residents (R) (R39, R46, and R49), resulting in a 16.13 percent medication error rate. The deficient practice placed residents at risk for inaccurate dosing and adverse clinical outcomes. Findings include:1. Review of R39's admission Record, dated [DATE] and located in the electronic medical record (EMR) under the Profile tab, revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident's diagnoses included hypertension. Review of R39's Physician's Order Report, dated [DATE] and located in the EMR under the Orders Tab, revealed an order dated [DATE] for the resident to receive ferrous sulfate (iron supplement) 325 milligrams (mg) one time per day and an order dated [DATE] for the resident to receive amlodipine (a blood pressure reducing medication) 2.5 mg…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-25 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, observation, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure proper storage of refrigerated medications in one of two medication storage rooms in the facility. The facility's failure to ensure medication was appropriately stored created the potential for residents to receive inactive/ineffective medication. Findings include:On 04/25/2026 at 12:00 PM, the facility's main medication storage room was observed with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 2, who served as Unit Manager. The refrigerator in the medication room was used to store multiple residents' medications, including insulin, suppositories, eye drops, and vaccine vials. The facility's temperature monitoring form dated 04/01/2026 through 04/25/2026 was in a book next to the refrigerator; however, temperature entries were missing over multiple days. At the time of observation, the refrigerator temperature was 34 degrees Fahrenheit, cooler than indicated by the facility's policy. Review of the facility's Medication Refrigerator Temperature Log for the refrigerator in the main medication…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-04-25 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — widespreadEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interviews, and review of the facility's policies, the facility failed to appropriately store medications in three of three medication storage carts (200-300 Hall cart, 400 Hall cart, and 500 Hall cart). Findings include: Review of the undated facility policy titled, Medication Labeling and Storage, noted: Policy Statement: The facility stores all medications and biologicals in locked compartments under proper temperature, humidity and light controls. Only authorized personnel have access to keys. Policy Interpretation and Implementation. Medication Storage: 1. Medications and biologicals are stored in the packaging, containers or other dispensing systems in which they are received. Only the issuing pharmacy is authorized to transfer medications between containers. 2. The nursing staff is responsible for maintaining medication storage and preparation areas in a clean, safe, and sanitary manner. [sic] During a medication storage observation of the 500 Hall medication cart, on 4/23/25 at 2:40 p.m., with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) CC, the second and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2025-04-25 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — widespreadEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
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 facilities policy, the facility failed to accommodate resident's food allergies, intolerances, and preferences for seven (7) residents that had been identified to have a latex allergy to include sampled residents. [Residents (R) #7, R#13, R#27, R#39, R#49, R#51and R#247]. Specifically, the facility failed to provide an appropriate alternative as evident by dietary staff plating food from the tray line using their hands donning latex gloves. The deficient practice had the potential to affect all residents who receive an oral diet from the kitchen. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Food Allergies, undated, revealed: Procedure 4, The facility must determine a practice for patient/resident identification for food allergy. The policy does not specifically identify latex allergies. Review of the facility policy titled, Bare Hand Contact with Food and Use of Plastic Gloves, not dated, revealed, Procedure 2, staff will use…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-04-25 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure that proper sanitation and food handling practices to prevent the outbreak of foodborne illness were followed and safe food handling for the prevention of foodborne illnesses throughout the facility's food handling processes, and failed to ensure proper hand hygiene or donning (putting on) of a protective apron during meal service tray line. Specifically, two freezers, one walk in refrigerator, three juice coolers, and one front and back ice cream cooler failed to have documentation verifying the temperatures of each. The deficient practice had the potential to affect all residents who receive an oral diet from the kitchen. Findings include: Review of the facility policy for reference cold and warm temperatures was requested, however the facility failed to provide the requested policy. Review of the facility policy titled, Employee Hygiene for Food Safety, not dated, revealed all food and nutrition service employees will practice personal hygiene and safe food handling…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-25 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
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 review of the facility's policies, the facility failed to provide services that meet professional standards for one of six residents observed for medication administration (Resident #41). Specifically, blood pressure monitoring was not provided following physician's orders before administering a medication. Findings include: Review of the undated facility policy titled, Administering Medications, noted: Policy Statement: Medications are administered in a safe and timely manner, and as prescribed. Policy Interpretation and Implementation . 2. The director of nursing services supervises and directs all personnel who administer medications and/or have related functions . 4. Medications are administered in accordance with prescriber orders, including any required time frame . 11. The following information is checked/verified for each resident prior to administering medications: a. Allergies to medications; and b. Vital signs, if necessary. [sic] Review of the medical…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-08 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, resident family and staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility's policy titled, Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation or Misappropriation - Reporting and Investigating, the facility failed to report an incident of sexual abuse for one of three sampled residents (R) (R1). This failure had the potential for abuse to other residents by staff. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation or Misappropriation - Reporting and Investigating states under Policy Statement: All reports of resident abuse (including injuries of unknown origin), neglect, exploitation, or theft/misappropriation of resident property are reported to local, state and federal agencies (as required by current regulations) and thoroughly investigated by facility management. Findings of all investigations are documented and reported. Under Policy Interpretation and Implementation, Reporting Allegations to the Administrator and Authorities: 1. If resident abuse, neglect,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2023-03-02 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interviews and policy reviews, the facility failed to maintain an effective infection control program related to the unsanitary conditions for three out of three medication carts, failed to ensure that a blood pressure cuff was properly disinfected after each resident use, failed to use barriers with multi-use medications, failed to wash and/or sanitize hands while administering medications to prevent possible cross-contamination, and failed to transport soiled linen in a covered container. The facility census was 93. Findings included: Review of facility policy titled Storage of Medications revised November 2020, revealed number three listed under Policy Interpretation and Implementation states: The nursing staff is responsible for maintaining medication storage and preparation areas in a clean, safe, and sanitary manner. Review of facility policy titled Cleaning and Disinfection of Resident-Care Items and Equipment. Revised September 2022 revealed Number one C. (1) states non-Critical resident-care items include bedpans, blood pressure cuffs, crutches,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2023-03-02 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — widespreadMake sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a safe environment related to unsafe employee smoking practices on facility grounds. Findings include: 1. A review of the policy titled Smoking Policy - Employees with a date of 2001 and a revision date of May 2019 revealed the policy statement of: It is the policy of this facility to provide our employees with as near a smoke-free environment as possible and to ensure safe smoking practices for those who smoke. The policy Interpretation and Implementation section revealed line numbered 1. Employee smoking is permitted only in places where it is designated. Smoking is prohibited in all other areas. The section titled Visitors revealed line numbered 2. Visitors are not permitted to smoke in any area that is not designated as a smoking area. On 3/1/23 at 1:20 p.m. observation of an area located outside of the dining area revealed two picnic tables on a grass area. Observation of the area around the tables revealed dry grass and dry, brown leaves covering the ground. Observation revealed one dark brown…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-03-02 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — patternProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
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 facility policy 'Resident Hydration and Prevention of Dehydration', the facility failed to ensure adequate hydration was provided to three of 40 sampled residents (R) (R#48, R#67, and R#285) and follow the fluid restriction for one of 40 sampled residents (R#26). Findings included: A review of facility policy 'Resident Hydration and Prevention of Dehydration' last revised October 2017 revealed 'This facility will strive to provide adequate hydration and to prevent and treat dehydration. Policy Interpretation and Implementation: Minimum fluid needs will be calculated and documented on initial, annual, and significant change assessments, using current standards of practice. Physician orders to limit fluids will take priority over calculated fluid needs. The dietitian may refer calculated needs to the physician if restrictions potentially increase risk for dehydration. The dietitian and nursing staff will educate the resident and family…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-03-02 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, record reviews, and review of the facility policy titled Dignity, the facility failed to ensure that 12 of 24 sampled residents (R) (R#48, R#58, R#26, R#69, R#440, R#29, R#51, R#38, R#54, R#33, R#18, and R#67) were treated in a dignified manner related to (1) placing medical instruction signage in an area easily viewed by other residents/visitors for R#48, R#58, R#26, R#69, R#440, R#29, R#51, R#38, R#54, R#33, and R#18; and (2) an uncovered catheter bag for R#67. Findings Included: 1. A Review of the policy titled Dignity dated 2001 and revised 2/21/22 revealed the policy statement to be: Each resident shall be cared for in a manner that promotes and enhances his or her sense of well-being, level of satisfaction with life, and feelings of self-worth and self-esteem. Policy interpretation and implementation section line numbered 10.b. Signs indicating the resident's clinical status or care needs are not openly posted in the resident's room unless specifically requested 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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-03-02 · tag F0644 — isolatedCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as 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 record review, staff interviews, and review of facility policy titled admission Criteria the facility failed to conduct a Level II Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) screening for one of 40 sampled residents (R) (R#39) following a new diagnosis of major depressive disorder and mild intellectual disabilities. Findings included: Review of facility policy 'admission Criteria' revealed: All new admissions and readmissions are screened for mental disorders (MD), intellectual disabilities (ID) or related disorders (RD) per the Medicaid Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) process. g. Residents will be evaluated at least quarterly for mental status or new diagnosis of mental disorder. A review of the clinical record revealed that R#39 was admitted to the facility 11/30/16 with diagnoses including but not limited to obesity, hyperlipidemia, and hypertension. On 2/19/20 diagnoses of mild intellectual disabilities and major depressive disorder were added. Review of quarterly…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-03-02 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop 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 record review, staff interviews, and review of facility policy 'Care Plan, Comprehensive Person-Centered', the facility failed to develop a person-centered comprehensive care plan related to nutrition/hydration needs for one of 40 sampled residents (R) (R#74). Findings included: Review of facility policy 'Care Plans, Comprehensive Person-Centered' last revised March 2022 revealed 'A comprehensive, person-centered care plan that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet the resident's physical, psychosocial and functional needs is developed and implemented for each resident. 2. The comprehensive, person-centered care plan is developed within seven (7) days of the completion of the required MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment (Admission, Annual or Significant Change in status), and no more than 21 days after admission. 11. Assessments of residents are ongoing and care plans are revised as information about the residents and the residents' conditions change. A review of the clinical record…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-03-02 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide 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 observation, record review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to document weekly skin assessments in accordance with Physician orders for one of 40 sampled residents (R) (R#77). Findings included: A review of the clinical record revealed R#77 was admitted to the facility 6/22/22 with diagnoses including but not limited to frontotemporal neurocognitive disorder, dementia, and atrial fibrillation. Review of quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score 99, indicating severe cognitive decline. A review of R#77's Physician orders dated March 2023 revealed an order for weekly skin assessments every Sunday on night shift. Further observation of February and March 2023 orders did not reveal orders for a treatment to the right elbow. During review of R#77's skin assessments the last skin assessment was performed 2/13/23. This skin assessment did not document any skin conditions. During observation on 2/28/23 at 2:20 p.m. R#77 was observed with 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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-03-02 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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 interviews, record and policy reviews, the facility failed to ensure the safety for one of 40 sampled residents (R) (R#28) related to ensuring safe smoking practices. Findings include: A review of the policy titled Smoking Policy Update dated 5/13/13 revealed a statement of: (The facility) will become a smoke-free facility. Effective date for clients in our facility to be smoke free will be June 15, 2013. For all new clients, the policy will be effectively immediately. The policy was signed by the Administrator. A review of the clinical record revealed that R#28 was a [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE] with diagnosis including unspecified vascular injury of the head and vascular dementia. On 2/28/23 at 10:46 a.m. and 3/1/23 at 9:20 a.m. interviews with R#28 revealed he is allowed to go outside to smoke when his family visits and accompanies him outside. He revealed he normally goes to the parking lot or to an area just outside of the building and smokes with his family but did not go to the employee…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-03-02 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff interview, and review of the policy titled Psychotropic Medication Use, the facility failed to ensure that psychotropic medications/antianxiety medications were not ordered as needed (PRN) for more than 14 days unless clinically indicated for two of five residents (R) (R#66 and R#77) reviewed for unnecessary medications. Findings included: Review of the policy titled Psychotropic Medication Use dated 2001 and revised July 2022 revealed the policy statement of: Residents will not receive medications that are not clinically indicated to treat a specific condition. The Policy and Interpretation and Implementation section revealed line numbered 12a.: As needed (PRN) orders for psychotropic medications are limited to 14 days. (1) For psychotropic medications that are not antipsychotics: If the prescriber or attending physician believes it is appropriate to extend the PRN order beyond 14 days, he or she will document the rationale for extending the use and include the duration for the PRN…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-03-02 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and review of the policies titled, Storage of Medications, the facility failed to ensure that one of three medication carts (400 Hall Medication Cart) was locked and secured when the carts were out of view of the nurse. The Deficient practice had the potential to allow unauthorized staff, visitors, and residents access to unsecured medications. Findings included: Review of the policy titled Storage of Medications dated November 2020 revealed the policy heading for the facility is to store all drugs and biologicals in a safe, secure, and orderly manner. Policy interpretation and implementation number 6 stated: Compartments (including, but not limited to, drawers, cabinets, rooms, refrigerators, carts, and boxes) containing drugs and biologicals are locked when not in use. Unlocked medication carts are not left unattended. potentially available to others. An observation on 3/1/23 at 2:00 a.m. on the 400 Hall revealed that one medication cart located in the hallway outside resident rooms to be unlocked two times as the nurse left the cart unattended…
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.
- No harm found · C2026-04-25 · tag F0732 — widespreadPost nurse staffing information every day.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on documentation review and interview, the facility failed to post daily nurse staffing data that included the total number of licensed and unlicensed staff working each shift responsible for resident care. This deficient practice has the potential to affect all residents and visitors by not informing them of the available nursing staff to care for the residents.Findings include:Review of the facility's posted daily nurse staffing data revealed the form included the facility's name, date, census, and the actual hours worked per shift for licensed and unlicensed staff responsible for resident care but did not contain the total number of licensed and unlicensed staff members who were on duty for each shift. During an interview on 04/24/26 at 2:32 PM with the Administrator and the Director of Nursing (DON), the DON stated he was responsible for calculating and posting the daily nurse staffing and all the required components of the posting. He stated he was unaware that the total number of staff members needed to be included in the posted report. He stated he would ensure 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.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CARROLLTON MANOR INC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/01/2007 |
| THOMPSON, EVELYN | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE DIRECTOR | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 02/01/2007 |
| THOMPSON, TRACE | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | 51% | since 02/01/2007 |
| THOMPSON, HENRY | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 02/01/2007 |
| THOMPSON, SHARON | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 02/01/2007 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 8 rows in the source record cover these 5 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
1 organizational owner 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.
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
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
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.
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 115638. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-25, 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.