Georgia Regional Atlanta LTC
3073 Panthersville Rd, SNF Bldg. #17, Decatur, GA 30034 · Government - State · 66 certified beds · (404) 243-2110 Medicaid only — no Medicare
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
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 | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 1 to 2 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 0.0% | 5.6% | 5.4% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.9% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 2.5% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 11.3% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 0.0% | 3.2% | 3.3% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 0.0% | 20.5% | 18.9% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 1.5% | 5.6% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 0.0% | 15.8% | 21.2% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 5.3% | 19.9% | 17.1% | better |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 66 beds and averages 12.9 residents a day — about 20% occupied, or roughly 53 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 5.15 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.77 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.38 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 4.38 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.46 on weekdays — 20% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 2.01 to 1.19 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
10 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Actual harm · G2026-02-13 · 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 record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to follow the plan of care, resulting in an accident for one of nine sampled residents (R)(R1) related to transferring with a mechanical lift. Harm was identified to have occurred on 2/6/2026, when two staff members were transferring the resident with the mechanical lift, and the resident fell, requiring transfer to an acute care hospital. The resident sustained a closed nondisplaced fracture of the sixth cervical vertebra from the fall. It was determined that the resident required three-person assistance with transferring with the mechanical lift.Findings included:A review of the written statement related to the incident that occurred on 2/6/2026 from Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) TT revealed the following: After she assisted R1 with dressing, they (her and CNA CC) placed the sling underneath him (R1). She stated that they attached the sling to the mechanical lift and began lifting R1 from the bed. Once he was fully lifted, she proceeded 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 · Dcited before2025-09-18 · 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
Based on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive person-centered care plan that addressed oxygen therapy needs for one of 19 sampled residents (R) (R13). This deficient practice had the potential to place the resident at risk for unmet care needs, respiratory complications, and diminished quality of life.Findings include:The facility did not have a policy related to care planning.Review of the care plan revealed the care plan did not include a problem, goal, or interventions related to oxygen (O2) use.Interview conducted on 9/18/2025 at 10:37 am with MDS Coordinator EE stated that O2 use should be triggered and addressed in the care plan. Upon review of R13's care plan, MDS Coordinator EE stated O2 therapy was not included and acknowledged it was omitted in error. She stated the possible negative outcome of not care planning O2 was that the resident might not get the care that they needed.Interview conducted on 9/18/2025 at 2:01 pm with the Administrator stated he did not believe it was necessary to care plan O2, noting the facility had…
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 before2025-09-18 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, staff interviews, record review, and review of facility's policy titled, Oxygen Therapy, the facility failed to ensure oxygen (O2) equipment was properly stored when not in use for one of 24 sampled residents (R) (R13). This deficient practice had the potential to place residents at risk of infection. Findings include:A review of the facility's policy titled Oxygen Therapy, reviewed on 7/16/2025 revealed under section titled, Storage and Equipment, all equipment associated with the delivery of oxygen should be discarded and replaced as needed with visible soiling, issues with patency, a defective device, or other issues that interfere with functionality and optimal oxygen delivery.Review of the electronic medical record (EMR) for R13 revealed diagnoses of but not limited to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), asthma, and mild neurocognitive disorder due to known physiological condition with behavioral disturbance.A review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE]…
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 · F2024-03-17 · tag F0838 — failed to assess facility resources and resident needs — widespreadConduct and document a facility-wide assessment to determine what resources are necessary to care for residents competently during both day-to-day operations (including nights and weekends) and emergencies.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interviews, record reviews, and review of the facility's documents titled, [name of facility] Skilled Unit Facility Assessment and (LPN) Licensed Practical Nurse: the facility failed to evaluate its resident population and identify the resources needed to provide the necessary care and services to meet the needs of one out of 10 sampled Residents (R) (R16) requiring wound care. In addition, the facility failed to update the Facility Assessment to accurately reflect all required components of an infection control plan. The facility had a census of 19 residents. Findings include: Review of the facility- provided [name of facility] Skilled Unit Facility Assessment dated January 15, 2023, revealed the facility provided pressure ulcers services to residents residing in the facility. The care required by the resident population considering types of disease states, conditions, physical and cognitive disabilities, overall acuity, and other pertinent facts that are present within that population: wound care. The staff competencies that are required to provide the level 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 · F2024-03-17 · tag F0851 — widespreadElectronically submit to CMS complete and accurate direct care staffing information, based on payroll and other verifiable and auditable data.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interview, record review, and review of the PBJ (Payroll Based Journal) [NAME] Report for First Quarter (Q1) of Fiscal Year 2024, the facility failed to submit direct care staffing data to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS). The facility census was 19 residents. Findings include: Review of the PBJ Data Staffing Report CASPER Report for Q1 2024, October 1 through December 31, revealed the facility failed to submit data for the quarter. During an interview on 3/16/2024 at 11:00 am with the Director of Nursing (DON) revealed, the facility did send the PBJ information into CMS and that he would look for proof. During an interview on 3/16/2024 at 11:30 am with the Administrator revealed that he had submitted the PBJ information to CMS each quarter. He stated he did not know where the return receipt was located, but he would look for it. During an interview on 3/16/2024 at 1:00 pm with the Administrator revealed, he could not find the return receipt for the information that was sent to CMS and that the facility did not have a policy related to PBJ. 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 · Fcited before2024-03-17 · 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 staff interview, record review, and review of the facility's policies titled Infection Prevention And Control and Infection Control Policy Surveillance and Reporting Infections the facility failed to provide evidence that infection control surveillance data was collected for 20 out of 20 months (June 2022 through February 2024) reviewed. The facility had a census of 19 residents. Findings include: Review of the policy titled Infection Prevention And Control dated 9/30/2023 under the section titled POLICY revealed, [Facility name] maintain comprehensive Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) programs that protect hospitalized individuals, visitors, staff, and others from Healthcare Associated Infections (HAIs). Under the section titled, Infection Surveillance revealed, 1. IPC Teams use a line listing form to record and track all infections. IPC data is gathered using multiple sources including, but not limited to: Culture and sensitivity reports, antibiotic dispensing reports, 24-hour nursing reports, infection reporting forms, and nursing rounds. 2. IPC Teams report all…
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 · F2024-03-17 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility's policies titled Infection Prevention And Control the facility failed to provide evidence of a monitoring system to track and trend antibiotic use for 20 out of 20 months (June 2022 through February 2023) of the infection control data reviewed. The facility had a census of 19 residents. Findings include: Review of the policy titled Infection Prevention And Control dated 9/30/2023 under the section titled POLICY revealed, [Facility name] maintain comprehensive Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) programs that protect hospitalized individuals, visitors, staff, and others from Healthcare Associated Infections (HAIs). Under the section titled, Infection Surveillance revealed, 1. IPC Teams use a line listing form to record and track all infections. IPC data is gathered using multiple sources including, but not limited to: Culture and sensitivity reports, antibiotic dispensing reports, 24-hour nursing reports, infection reporting forms, 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 · F2024-03-17 · tag F0882 — widespreadDesignate a qualified infection preventionist to be responsible for the infection prevent and control program in the nursing home.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interviews and review of the facility's policy titled, Infection Prevention And Control, the facility failed to designate a qualified Infection Preventionist who completed specialized training in Infection Prevention and Control. This failure placed all residents at risk for the potential transmission of infections and communicable diseases. The facility had a census of 19 residents. Findings include: Review of the policy titled Infection Prevention And Control dated 9/30/2023 under the section titled POLICY revealed, [Facility name] maintain comprehensive Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) programs that protect hospitalized individuals, visitors, staff, and others from Healthcare Associated Infections (HAIs). Under the section titled Procedures revealed, 2 (a) Committee members, representing a variety of departments and clinical services, are appointed by Hospital Leadership. Members include but are not limited to an Infection Prevention and Control (IPC)/Infection Preventionist (IP). 3 (i) The IPC Practitioners are licensee registered nurses with strong clinical…
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 before2024-03-17 · 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
Based on staff interviews and record review, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive person-centered plan for one out of 10 sampled Residents (R) (R3). Specifically, the facility failed to address the resident's medical needs related to the use of an antiviral medication. Findings include: Review of the medical records for R3 revealed that she had a physician's order for Acyclovir (an antiviral) 10 ml every eight hours for recurring Herpes Simplex of right gluteus with a start date of 3/11/2024, and a stop date of 3/18/2024. Interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) DD on 3/16/2024 at 10:50 am revealed she was familiar with R3 and her care. She stated that R3 was taking an antiviral for Herpes. LPN DD stated that there was no care plan for the antiviral. She confirmed that there should be a care plan, and that the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Coordinator was responsible for care plans. She stated that the MDS coordinator was not working today because she does not work on the weekend. Interview with LPN EE on 3/16/2024 at 10:59 am revealed R3 was on an antiviral for Herpes. She…
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 · D2024-03-17 · 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 staff interviews and record review, the facility failed to assess, measure, and document the status of a pressure wound and obtain a physician's order for treatments for one out of 10 sampled Residents (R) (R16) reviewed for pressure ulcer/injury. This deficient practice had the potential to result in complications of the wound and further impair the resident's skin integrity and infection. Findings include: Record review revealed R16 was admitted with the diagnoses that included cerebral palsy, profound mental retardation, congenital quadriplegia, and contractures of multiple joints. Record review revealed R16's Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 12/2/2023, revealed a Brief Interview Mental Status (BIMS) without a score, which indicated R16 was severely cognitively impaired. Further review of the MDS revealed the resident was at risk for developing pressure ulcers. Record review revealed R16 had an order with a start date of 11/16/2023 and a discontinued effective…
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 | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership Data Not Available |
The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
What families pay in GA
CMS lists this home as Medicaid-certified only — it can accept Medicaid for long-term care, but it is not Medicare-certified, so Medicare will not pay for a short rehabilitation (“skilled nursing”) stay here. 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 11A186. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-09-18, 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.