Pruitthealth - Fort Oglethorpe

Location & what’s nearby

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

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

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

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.24 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 33% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 3% 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 120 beds and averages 100.6 residents a day — about 84% occupied, or roughly 19 beds typically open. It usually has some room. 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 2.70 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.47 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.58 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 2.03 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 2.97 on weekdays — 32% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.54 to 0.27 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 47% 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 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.

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.

20 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 8 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · G2023-01-12 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, record review, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure the comprehensive care plan addressed the need for pain management prior to and/or during wound care for one of three sampled residents (R) (R#94) reviewed for pain management. The resident was observed to exhibit signs and symptoms of pain throughout a wound care procedure on 1/11/23 but did not receive pain medication until the surveyor intervened. Findings included: A review of a facility policy titled, Care Plans, effective dated 12/31/96, revealed. The comprehensive person-centered care plan is developed to include measurable goals and timeframes to meet a patient/resident's medical, nursing and psychosocial needs, the services that are to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment. Review of a facility policy titled, Pain Assessment Forms, revised 10/6/15, 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Actual harm · G2023-01-12 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolated
  Provide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
  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, record reviews, and facility policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure pain medication ordered on an as-needed (PRN) basis was administered prior to and/or during wound care for one of three sampled residents (R) (R#94) reviewed for pain during wound care. Specifically, no pain medication was administered to R#94 prior to wound care, and when the resident exhibited signs and symptoms of pain, the licensed nurse continued the wound care without administering pain medication until the surveyor intervened. This failed practice resulted in R#94 repeatedly exhibiting signs and symptoms of pain while wound care was provided. Findings included: Review of a facility policy titled, Wound Observation and Assessment Documentation, revised 3/10/21, revealed, Procedure: 1. Assess for pain before, during and after treatment. Intervene as appropriate following physician orders. Review of a facility policy titled, Pain Assessment Forms, revised 10/6/15, revealed, At 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-01-15 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, resident and staff interviews and record review, the facility failed to promote care in a manner that maintained or enhanced each resident's dignity, respect, and rights for one of 46 sampled residents (R) (R4).Findings include:Review of R4's electronic medical record (EMR) revealed that he was admitted to the facility with diagnoses including but not limited to hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting right dominant side, contracture, right hand, other abnormalities of gait and mobility, unsteadiness on feet, weakness, muscle weakness (generalized), other lack of coordination.Review of Resident Face Sheet revealed R4 was his own Responsible Party.Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) for R4 dated 12/17/2025 documented a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating R4 is cognitively intact. Section GG (Functional Abilities and Goals) revealed impairment on one side upper extremity. Impairment on one side lower extremity. Independent…

  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 · D2026-01-15 · tag F0576 — isolated
  Ensure residents have reasonable access to and privacy in their use of communication methods.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations and staff and resident interviews, the facility failed to provide the right to communicate in their preferred language for one of three residents (R76) reviewed for communication. The deficient practice had the potential for R76 not to receive needed care and services. Findings include:Review of the facility's undated document titled Notice of Nondiscrimination revealed the name of company organization provides free aids and services to people with disabilities to communicate effectively with us, including: Qualified sign language interpreters; Written information in other formats (large print, audio, accessible electronic formats, other formats). The name of company Organization provides free language services to people whose primary language is not English, such as: Qualified interpreters; Information written in other languages.Review of the electronic medical record (EMR) revealed R76 was admitted with diagnoses including but not limited to bilateral primary osteoarthritis of knee-PDx (affecting both knees), adult failure to thrive, and depression.Further…

  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 · D2026-01-15 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, staff interviews, and review of the facility's policy titled, HVAC (Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning), PTAC (Packaged Terminal Air Conditioner Clean Air Filters, the facility failed to maintain a safe, clean, and homelike environment by not ensuring PTAC units were clean, intact, and free of debris, rust, and damage in two of 14 rooms (room [ROOM NUMBER] and room [ROOM NUMBER]) on the 200 Hall. The deficient practice had the potential to affect resident comfort, air quality, and environmental cleanliness.Findings include:Review of the facility policy titled, HVAC (PTAC): Clean Air Filters, documented under the section titled, Steps:1. Remove or open access cover.2. Remove air filter and inspect for cleanliness. If filter is dirty, either wash or replace depending on type of filter. If clean, reinstall filter.3. Re-install access cover.4. Clean grill on cover.5. Close and make sure it is secure.6. At a minimum, air filters are to be replaced or thoroughly cleaned depending on type…

  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 · D2026-01-15 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
  Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
  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, resident and staff interviews, and review of the facility's policy titled, Documentation: Charting Activities of Daily Living (ADLs), the facility failed to adequately provide Activities of Daily Living related to bathing for three of 46 dependent sampled residents (R) (R21, R33, and R84). The deficient practice had the potential to cause discomfort and compromise personal hygiene.Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Documentation: Charting Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) revised 2/18/2021 revealed under Policy Statement: It is required for Activities of Daily Living (ADL) care given by Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs) and Nurses to be documented under Care Assist in patient's/resident's Electronic Healthcare Record (EHR). The policy further under ADL Documentation Tracking: The healthcare center will utilize a daily tracking in Care Assist or the CNA ADL Flow Sheet for each patient/resident which includes the ADLs as defined by the Centers for…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-15 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, staff interviews, and review of the facility's policy titled, Smoke Free Policy, the facility failed to adhere to the smoking times and to provide supervision during smoking for one resident (R) (R80) who was grandfathered in.Findings include:Review of the facility policy titled Smoke Free Policy revised 10/15/2019 revealed in section Procedure, .10. When the grandfathered patient/resident is identified as needing supervision, the supervision shall be provided by a partner who is physically present in the designated smoking area for all residents who need supervision based on their Smoking Observation Form or electronic documentation.Review of R80's electronic health record (EHR) revealed that he was admitted to the facility with diagnoses including, but not limited to, hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting right dominant side-pdx. unspecified lack of coordination, essential (primary) hypertension, vascular dementia, age-related nuclear cataract,…

  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 · F2024-09-12 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
  Procure 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 review of the facility's policies titled, Receiving and Storage of Food and Supplies and Hand Washing, the facility failed to ensure food stored in the kitchen was labeled, dated, and not expired. Additionally, staff failed to perform adequate hand hygiene when leaving and returning to food preparation area after touching the lid of trash can. This had the potential to increase the spread of foodborne illness and infection for 108 out of 109 residents that received meals from the kitchen. Findings include: Review of facility policy titled, Receiving and Storage of Food and Supplies dated September 2001. Under the section labeled Guidelines: 1. The DM or trained designee is accountable for receiving and storage of food .7. Supplies already on shelves shall be moved forward and the latest date supplies placed on the back of shelves . 12. Date all stock with current delivery date. Review of the facility policy titled, Hand Washing dated September 2001 revealed, To prevent spreading bacteria, the dietary staff must wash their hands properly…

  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.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-09-12 · tag F0623 — pattern
  Provide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on resident and staff interviews and record review, the facility failed to provide a written notice of a transfer to the resident and/or resident's Responsible Party (RP) for three of three residents (Resident (R) 80, R32, and R73) reviewed for hospitalization out of a sample of 32 residents. This had the potential for the resident and or RP not knowing where and why a resident was transferred. Findings include: 1. Review of the Resident Face Sheet located in the electronic medical record (EMR) under the Face Sheet tab documented R80 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had a diagnosis of dementia. Review of the Progress Note found in the EMR under the Progress Note tab dated 05/16/24 documented the physician was notified that R80 had an elevated axillary temperature of 102.3 degrees Fahrenheit (F), his right elbow had increased swelling, was red, hot, very painful, and he was transferred to the hospital. There was no documentation in the EMR that R80 or the RP were notified of the transfer to the…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-09-12 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to offer residents hand hygiene prior to meals for five of five residents observed (Residents (R)24, R68, R99, R105, and R37) out of a total sample of 32 residents. This had the potential for the risk of transmission of infections. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident Face Sheet found in the Electronic Medical Record (EMR) under the Face Sheet tab documented R24 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis of dementia. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) found in the EMR under the RAI tab with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 08/05/24 documented R24 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of nine out of 15, which indicated moderately impaired cognition, required set up by staff for eating, and was dependent on staff for hygiene, which included hand washing. During an observation on 09/09/24, at 1:00 PM, revealed R24 was sitting in his chair in his room. A staff member assisted R24 with…

  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 · D2024-09-12 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
  Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on review of the facility's surveillance video, staff interview, record review, and review of the facility's policy titled, Prevention of Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation, Mistreatment, and Misappropriation of Property, the facility failed to ensure one (Resident (R)62) was free from sexual abuse by R50 out of a sample of 32 residents. This had the potential for further sexual abuse for the resident and other residents by R50. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Prevention of Patient Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation, Mistreatment, and Misappropriation of Property, reviewed 12/07/22, indicated, It is the policy . to actively preserve each patient's right to be free from . sexual.abuse.Sexual abuse is non-consensual sexual contact of any type with a resident Review of the Resident Face Sheet located under the Face Sheet tab of the electronic medical record (EMR) revealed R62 was admitted to the facility with a diagnosis of dementia and Alzheimer's. Review of R62's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) located under the RAI tab of the EMR with an Assessment Reference…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-09-12 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
  Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, staff interview, record review, and review of the facility's policy titled, Prevention of Patient Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation, Mistreatment, and Misappropriation of Property, the facility failed to complete a thorough investigation for two incidents of resident to resident sexual abuse for one (Resident (R) 62) by R50 out of three residents reviewed for abuse out of 32 residents reviewed in the sample. This failure had the potential for unknown other incidents of sexual abuse for R62 or any other residents. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Prevention of Patient Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation, Mistreatment, and Misappropriation of Property, reviewed 12/07/22, indicated, 1. The Administrator of the provider is responsible for assuring that an accurate and timely investigation is completed. If there is an occurrence of or allegation involving patient abuse (including injuries of unknown source), neglect, exploitation, mistreatment or misappropriation of patient property, the following investigation and reporting procedures will be followed:…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

Fines & penalties

$10,699 in federal fines across 2 penalties.

• $4,017 — penalty dated 2024-09-12
• $6,682 — penalty dated 2024-09-12

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

Part of a chain

This home belongs to PRUITTHEALTH — 95 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

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

The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

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.

About 75% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $2.1M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 23% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

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