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

Nhc Healthcare Ft Oglethorpe

2403 Battlefield Pkwy, Fort Oglethorpe, GA 30742 · For profit - Corporation · 135 certified beds · (706) 866-7700 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (706) 866-7700 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
2 actual-harm citations$16,530 in federal fines
Insights

The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
Worth asking about
  • it has 2 actual-harm citations
  • the CMS record shows $16,530 in federal fines (most recent 2024-04-25)
  • nursing-staff turnover (58%) runs well above the national median (45%)

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.

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

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★ 3/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
2366 Battlefield Pkwy · (706) 419-0225 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
91 Crye Leike Dr · (706) 861-0903 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
112 Fort Town Dr · (706) 956-8943 · Call to confirm hours
Park
19 Van Cleve St · (706) 866-5045 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
1733 Battlefield Pkwy · (706) 820-6314

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
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 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 2 to 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

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

Overall rating5★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased12.0%15.3%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight5.9%5.6%5.4%typical
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder2.0%0.9%0.9%worse
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection1.0%2.5%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.0%11.3%6.5%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury5.9%3.2%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened13.6%15.2%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication32.2%20.5%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%95.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers4.1%5.6%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control13.4%15.8%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table9.1%19.9%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.2%2.6%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine99.4%78.4%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission27.6%25.0%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit8.2%11.6%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.612.151.67typical
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.751.901.80better

* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.

§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.

CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

62.9% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 170 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

62.9%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
9.2%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
85.9%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.32U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.17hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.11hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.05hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 85.9% 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 64 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 0.32 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 53% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 6% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF62.9%CMS range 55.7–70.551.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF9.2%CMS range 6.7–12.210.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge85.9%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge68.8%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge84.4%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting86.6%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.3%CMS range 4.8–11.87.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.931.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

0.74
RN hours/ resident / day
0.75
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.82
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.31
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.63
RN hoursweekends
58.2%
Total nursing turnover
50.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 135 beds and averages 122.6 residents a day — about 91% occupied, or roughly 12 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 3.31 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.74 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.82 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.76 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.53 on weekdays — 22% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.79 to 0.63 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 58% is well above 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

2
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-09-26)
2
at the previous standard inspection (2024-04-25)

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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

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

  • Actual harm · G2024-04-25 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
    Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, record review, and facility policy review titled, Skin Integrity Manual, the facility failed to implement pressure injury interventions, including the removal of a resident's walking boot to perform daily skin checks, to prevent the development of unstageable pressure ulcers for one of three Residents (R) (R172) reviewed for pressure ulcers. This failure caused harm to R172 who developed three avoidable facility acquired unstageable pressure ulcers on her right foot, right heel, and right calf. Findings included: A review of the facility's policy titled Skin Integrity Manual, with a review date of January 2024, indicated, Steps in Prevention of Pressure Injuries Identification of patient at risk . Interventions and Strategies . Prevention Strategies Monitor for pressure when splints, casts, or braces are used Approach Inspect skin around and under splints and braces daily. Inspect skin around edges of cast daily. Report odors emanating from under cast or complaints of pressure or pain to…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Actual harm · G2024-04-25 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, record review, and facility policy review titled, Falls Program, the facility failed to ensure staff provided adequate supervision and assistance device to prevent falls for one of seven Residents (R) (R172) residents reviewed for falls out of a total sample of 31 residents. This failure resulted in harm to R172 who fell in the shower room, while being assisted by only one Certified Nurse Aide (CNA), and as a result she sustained fractures to her right foot, right tibia, and right fibula. Findings included: A review of the facility's policy titled, Falls Program, dated January 2024, indicated, Purpose: To identify patients at risk for falling and to implement the appropriate interventions. Objective: To reduce the patients' risk of falling and related injuries. 1. A review of R172's Face Sheet, located in the Resident tab of the electronic medical record (EMR) revealed the resident was admitted to the facility in 2018 with diagnoses which included history of falling, major depressive…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-09-26 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
    Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interviews, record review, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure residents reviewed for accuracy of medical records had active physician orders for respiratory care and current pressure ulcer status for one of one resident (Resident (R) 36) reviewed for respiratory care and one of two residents (R22) reviewed for pressure ulcers out of a total of 30 residents in the sample. The deficient practice had the potential for facility residents to not receive appropriate care and services to meet their needs for oxygen usage and wound care treatment.Findings include:Review of the facility's policy titled, Respiratory Manual, dated July 2019, revealed The purpose of delivering oxygen by nasal cannula is to.correct hypoxemia by increasing available alveolar oxygen.diminish the myocardial workload by correcting hypoxemia. Check for a complete physician order.Review of the facility's policy titled, Documentation Guidelines, dated May 2025, revealed Medications and Treatments are…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-09-26 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, record review, resident and staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure catheter drainage bags were not in direct contact with the floor for one of one resident (Resident (R) 55) reviewed for catheters out of 32 sample residents. In addition, the facility failed to ensure staff performed adequate hand hygiene between residents during medication administration for three residents (R118, R48, and R54) reviewed for medication administration. These deficient practices had the potential to place residents at risk for the spread of infection and cross-contamination and created a risk for an increased potential for urinary tract infectionsFindings include:1. Review of the facility policy titled, MRSA (Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus) Recommendations by sited, dated February 2025 revealed, .under Patients with Urinary Catheters, indicated keep drainage bags off the floor., but below the level of the patients bladder.Review of the admission Record located in the Profile tab of the electronic medical record (EMR) revealed that…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2022-10-14 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — widespread
    Ensure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, record reviews, and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure that direct care nursing staff were evaluated to provide competent nursing care for the residents, by not completing competency/skills checklist for three Licensed Practical Nurses (LPN) and one Registered Nurse (RN). Findings include: Review of facility documentation titled Annual Nursing Competencies Check-Offs, revealed in-service education for nursing personnel were not signed and dated to indicate the personnel completed the trainings to ensure quality care of the residents. The facility was unable to provide annual competencies that were signed and dated for the following randomly selected staff: LPN GG, LPN CC, LPN PP and RN OO. Interview on 10/12/22 at 9:25 a.m. with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) NN revealed she has worked at this facility for about four weeks, she has not received any orientation training. She further revealed she shadowed another CAN for one week after being hired and was then assigned independent assignments. Interview on 10/11/22 at 4:43 p.m. with the Director…

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

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2022-10-14 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
    Ensure 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and review of the facility policy titled Medication Storage in the Facility, the facility failed to ensure that two of six medication carts (200 Hall Cart and 400 Hall Cart) were locked and secured when the cart was out of view of the nurse and failed to properly store medication for one of 30 Sampled residents (R) (R#66). Findings include: 1. Review of the facility policy titled Medication Storage in the Facility dated 1/1/19 revealed: Medications and biologicals are stored safely, securely and properly following manufacturer's recommendations or those of the supplier. The medication supply is accessible only to licensed nursing personnel, pharmacy personnel or staff members lawfully authorized to administer medications. B. Only licensed nurses, pharmacy personnel and those lawfully authorized to administer medications are permitted to access medications. Medication rooms, carts and medication supplies are locked when not attended by persons with authorized access. 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2022-10-14 · tag F0924 — pattern
    Put firmly secured handrails on each side of hallways.
    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 and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure that two handrails were firmly and securely attached to the wall on two of seven halls (100 Hall and 300 Hall) and failed to ensure that handrails were not a safety hazard based on one handrail had a missing end piece with a one-inch piece of silver, firm and sharp object protruding from the end. Findings include: An observation on 10/11/22 at 2:40 p.m. revealed a handrail on the wall between rooms [ROOM NUMBERS] to have a piece of the handrail missing and to have a one-inch piece of silver, firm and sharp object protruding from the end. An observation on 10/11/22 at 2:45 p.m. revealed a loose handrail on the wall between rooms [ROOM NUMBERS]. When surveyor tugged on handrail, it came loose from the wall and fell to the floor. An observation on 10/11/22 at 2:50 p.m. revealed a loose handrail on the wall between rooms 311-313. R#63 pulled on it as he rolled his wheelchair and the handrail fell from the wall to the floor. The resident was no…

    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.

    Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-10-14 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
    Honor 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 observation, record review, the facility failed to place a privacy bag over the indwelling Foley Catheter of one of 30 sampled residents (R) #336. Findings include: Review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] for R#366 revealed in section (H) Bowel and Bladder - Indwelling Foley Catheter, and always incontinent of bowel. (I) Active Diagnosis (including but not limited to) - Neurogenic bladder. (N) Medications - antidepressant, diuretic, and opioid seven days a week. Review of the medical record for R#336 revealed that resident admitted from hospital on 9/12/22, with foley catheter need for neurogenic bladder. Change catheter monthly. During an observation on 10/11/22 at 1:30 p.m. of R#336 in her room revealed her catheter bag to be hanging, uncovered, on the left side of the frame of the bed and visible from the hallway. During an observation on 10/12/22 at 9:12 a.m. of R#336 in her room revealed her catheter bag to be hanging uncovered, on the left side of the bed frame visible from the…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-10-14 · tag F0554 — isolated
    Allow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, record review and policy reviews, the facility failed to assess one of 30 sampled residents (R) R#106 for the ability to self-administer medications before leaving medications at the bed side. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Medication Administration - General Guidelines dated 1/1/19 revealed: Medications are administered as prescribed in accordance with good nursing principles and practices and only by persons legally authorized to do so. Personnel authorized to administer medications do so only after they have been properly oriented to the facility's medication distribution system (procurement, storage, handling and administration). The facility has staff and a medication distribution system to ensure safe administration of medications without unnecessary interruptions. B. Administration: 1) Medications are administered only by licensed nursing, medical, pharmacy or other personnel authorized by state laws and regulations to administer medications. 2)…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-10-14 · tag F0626 — isolated
    Permit a resident to return to the nursing home after hospitalization or therapeutic leave that exceeds bed-hold policy.
    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 interviews with staff, family, and hospital staff, the facility failed to ensure one of three residents (R) (R#109) reviewed for transfer and/or discharge residents was permitted to return to the facility after being transferred to the hospital. Findings include: An interview with R#109's daughter on 10/11/22 at 11:45 a.m., revealed that the resident was due to return from the hospital on [DATE]. Transportation was set up for 6:00 p.m. The daughter stated that when transportation had arrived, that they told the hospital that the facility did not have a bed for a COVID positive resident. The daughter told the hospital that they would take the resident home so that the resident didn't have to stay another night in the hospital. Interview with Social Service Director (SSD) on 10/14/22 at 10:43 a.m. revealed that the hospital tried to send R#109 back to the facility on the weekend, and she stated that the ADON said that they did not have a room available because the resident was COVID…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-10-14 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to provide appropriate treatment and services to increase range of motion and/or to prevent further decrease in range of motion for one of 30 sampled residents (R) (R#95). Findings include: A review of the clinical record revealed that R#64 was admitted to the facility 11/20/20 with diagnoses including but not limited to postviral fatigue syndrome, Hemiplegia, muscle wasting atrophy, ataxia, anorexia, hypertension, adult failure to thrive and Major Depressive Disorder. A review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) revealed R#95 has a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of zero, indicating sever cognize impairment; requires extensive assistance with dressing, toileting, and personal hygiene. One person assistance was required with eating and bathing. A review of the Restorative Nursing Services Policy with revised date of July 2017 revealed that residents will receive restorative nursing care as needed to help promote optimal safety and independence and goals and objectives are individualized 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-10-14 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolated
    Ensure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
    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, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to follow Physician's Order for one of two residents (R) (R#66) who received nutrition via gastric feeding tube. Findings include: During an observation on 10/11/22 at 10:45 a.m. a syringe and tubing were observed uncovered in a graduate container at bedside. Unable to visualize any type of labeling on either the syringe or tubing. During an observation on 10/12/22 at 10:57 a.m., tube feeding supplies were at R#66 bedside table uncovered and undated syringe. A review of physician's orders revealed Tube Feeding- Change daily and date: irrigation set, syringe, tubing once a Day 7:00 p.m. - 7:00 a.m. A review of R#66's Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed there is an order on the MAR for documentation of when the feeding supplies are to be replaced and dated. An observation on 10/13/22 at 9:40 a.m. of Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) AA of a bolus tube feeding revealed: LPN AA washed her hands and donned gloves, inserted [NAME]…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

$16,530 in federal fines across 2 penalties.

  • $8,018 — penalty dated 2024-04-25
  • $8,512 — penalty dated 2024-04-25

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

Part of a chain

This home belongs to NATIONAL HEALTHCARE CORPORATION — 69 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 5 of 54.0+1.0 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 53.5+0.5 vs chain
Staffing 3 of 53.5-0.5 vs chain
Quality measures 5 of 54.4+0.6 vs chain
The other 68 homes this chain runs (chain average 4.0★, per CMS)
1 of 5NHC Healthcare - MauldinGreenville, SC 2 of 5NHC Healthcare - CharlestonCharleston, SC 2 of 5NHC Healthcare, GlasgowGlasgow, KY 2 of 5Nhc Healthcare RossvilleRossville, GA 2 of 5Nhc Healthcare, AnnistonAnniston, AL 2 of 5Nhc Healthcare, FranklinFranklin, TN 2 of 5Nhc Healthcare, JoplinJoplin, MO 2 of 5Nhc Healthcare, SpringfieldSpringfield, TN 2 of 5Osage Beach Rehabilitation And Health Care CenterOsage Beach, MO 2 of 5White Oak Manor-ShelbyShelby, NC 3 of 5Adamsplace, LLCMurfreesboro, TN 3 of 5NHC Healthcare - GreenwoodGreenwood, SC 3 of 5Nhc Healthcare, Ft SandersKnoxville, TN 3 of 5Nhc Healthcare, HendersonvilleHendersonville, TN 3 of 5Nhc Healthcare, KnoxvilleKnoxville, TN 3 of 5Nhc Healthcare, LewisburgLewisburg, TN 3 of 5Nhc Healthcare, PulaskiPulaski, TN 3 of 5Nhc Healthcare, SmithvilleSmithville, TN 3 of 5Nhc Healthcare, SpartaSparta, TN 3 of 5Nhc Healthcare, TullahomaTullahoma, TN 3 of 5The Health Center At Richland PlaceNashville, TN 3 of 5The MeadowsNashville, TN 3 of 5White Oak Manor - YorkYork, SC 4 of 5NHC HealthCare - North AugustaNorth Augusta, SC 4 of 5NHC Healthcare - BlufftonOkatie, SC 4 of 5NHC Healthcare - Garden CityGarden City, SC 4 of 5NHC Healthcare - LexingtonWest Columbia, SC 4 of 5Nhc Healthcare, ChattanoogaChattanooga, TN 4 of 5Nhc Healthcare, ColumbiaColumbia, TN 4 of 5Nhc Healthcare, DeslogeDesloge, MO 4 of 5Nhc Healthcare, Maryland HeightsMaryland Heights, MO 4 of 5Nhc Healthcare, MilanMilan, TN 4 of 5Nhc Healthcare, Oak RidgeOak Ridge, TN 4 of 5Nhc Healthcare, OakwoodLewisburg, TN 4 of 5Nhc Healthcare, St CharlesSaint Charles, MO 4 of 5Nhc Place At Cool SpringsFranklin, TN 4 of 5White Oak Manor - CharlestonCharleston, SC 4 of 5White Oak Manor - SpartanburgSpartanburg, SC 5 of 5HeartlandNashville, TN 5 of 5Holston Health & Rehabilitation CenterKnoxville, TN

Showing 40 of 68; lowest-rated first.

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

Who owns this facility

Investor-owned

CMS ownership filings flag an owner of this facility as an investment firm. That’s a fact worth knowing about who ultimately profits from the home. Read the inspection and staffing record above on its own merits.

  • MORGAN STANLEY — investment firm · 5.30% share · 5% Or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest
  • VANGUARD GROUP INC — investment firm · 9.00% share · 5% Or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest

Source: CMS SNF ownership filings (PECOS). These flags are self-reported and undercount — federal auditors (GAO) and researchers find CMS captures only a fraction of true private-equity and REIT ties, so the absence of a flag on other homes is not proof they lack investor owners. How investor ownership affects care →

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
NHC/DELAWARE INCOrganizationDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; GENERAL PARTNERSHIP INTERESTsince 09/01/1989
MORGAN STANLEY INSTITUTIONAL ADVISORS LLCOrganizationINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFsince 11/08/2024
BIDWELL, GREGORYIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 07/01/2000
NATIONAL HEALTHCARE CORPORATIONOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/01/1989
NHC-OP LPOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/01/1989
ANDERSON, ZACHARYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/03/2025
DODSON, VICKIIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/01/2019
HARNDEN, CELESTEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 11/01/2023
KIDD, BRIANIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2017
THOMPSON, CHRISTINEAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 10/16/2023
USSERY, ROBERTIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 07/01/2000
BLACKROCK INCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 03/20/2019
DIMENSIONAL FUND ADVISORS LPOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 03/07/2023
MORGAN STANLEYOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 11/08/2024
NATIONAL HEALTH CORPORATIONOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 09/01/1989
VANGUARD GROUP INCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 03/27/2017

CMS files one row per role, so the 27 rows in the source record cover these 16 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

9 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

$12.8M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-1.1%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.1M
Related-party expense8% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 60%Medicare 8%Other / private 31%

This home reported $1.1M paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

$282per resident / day
operating cost
$8,572per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$279per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

What families pay in GA

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Georgia Medicaid page.

Typical monthly cost in Georgia
$8,821/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$9,429/mo
Nursing home (private)
$5,300/mo
Assisted living

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 115492. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-09-26, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next