Bell Minor Home, The

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.

42.7% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that worse than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 185 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 18.0% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 89 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 0.35 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 59% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 10% 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 104 beds and averages 100.6 residents a day — about 97% occupied, or roughly 3 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. 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 3.13 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.28 is below 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 2.81 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.25 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.30 to 0.23 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 82% 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

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.

31 citations, most serious first. The 15 most serious are shown; the remaining 16 are one tap away and print in full.

• Immediate jeopardy · J2025-03-30 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
  Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
  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 review of the facility's policy titled Change in a Resident's Condition or Status, the facility failed to ensure that two of 40 sampled residents (R) (R159 and R9), medical providers, and family were timely notified of a change in condition. R159's medical provider was not notified of any changes in the resident's condition, including the lack of pedal pulses. Additionally, R159's family was not made aware of the resident's condition from 8/28/2024 until 9/7/2024. On 9/7/2024, R159's family was concerned about the resident's condition and requested that the resident be transferred to the hospital; however, the facility denied the request. Additionally, on 5/15/2024, the facility identified a change in R9's diabetic foot ulcer; however, the facility did not notify the resident's wound practitioner, who was treating the wound, until 5/16/2024, when the resident was transferred to the hospital. In addition, the facility failed to notify R9's family of a wound that had been…

  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
• Immediate jeopardy · J2025-03-30 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
  Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on the interviews, record review, and a review of the facility's policies titled Abuse Prevention Policy, Pressure Ulcer Treatment, and Prevention of Pressure Ulcers, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from abuse and neglect for three of six residents (R) (R159, R9, and R360) reviewed for abuse and neglect. (1) The facility neglected to emergently transfer R159 to the hospital per the family's request and failed to notify R159's physician after a change in condition, which resulted in a delay in treatment. (2) The facility failed to notify R9's wound treatment provider of the worsening of the resident's diabetic ulcer. (3) R360 was physically abused by her roommate (R46), who had a history of abusing other residents. These failures caused actual harm and death to the residents. On [DATE], R159 was emergently transferred to the hospital, where she expired from complications related to the facility's failure to notify the resident's physician of her change in condition. On [DATE], the facility…

  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
• Immediate jeopardy · J2025-03-30 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
  Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, record review, and review of the facility's policy titled Change in a Resident's Condition or Status, the facility failed to ensure the nursing staff used their clinical skills and judgement to identify and notify the resident's medical provider of the worsening of skin condition for one of three sampled residents (R) (R159). On [DATE] and [DATE], R159 had a change in condition when pedal pulses were unpalpable; however, nursing staff did not identify this as a change in condition, and the resident's medical provider was not notified. On [DATE], R159 was emergently transferred to the hospital, where she expired hours after arriving at the hospital due to complications from the worsening of her skin condition. On [DATE], a determination was made that a situation in which the facility's noncompliance with one or more requirements of participation caused or had the likelihood to cause serious injury, harm, impairment, or death to residents. The facility's Administrator and Regional Director of…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Immediate jeopardy · J2025-03-30 · 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 observation, interview, record review, and a review of the facility's policies titled Prevention of Pressure Ulcers and Pressure Ulcer Treatment, the facility failed to ensure that three of three sampled residents (R) (R104, R2, and R307) did not develop facility-acquired pressure ulcers. The facility failed to prevent the development of significant pressure ulcers for two of the three residents reviewed (R104 and R2). The facility failed to provide oversight, ensuring pressure ulcer assessments were completed, and ensure pressure ulcer treatment was provided in a timely manner and per the physician's orders. 1. R104 did not have preventive interventions in place before [DATE], when a pressure ulcer to the sacrum was identified. There were no treatment orders until [DATE] for the sacrum, at which time the wound was to be cleansed, and a honey cover with border dressing was to be applied. R104 was admitted to hospice on [DATE]. There was no assessment of the pressure ulcer on R104's sacrum with a…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Actual harm · H2025-03-30 · tag F0835 — failed to run the facility competently — pattern
  Administer the facility in a manner that enables it to use its resources effectively and efficiently.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interviews, facility policy review, and job description review, the facility administration failed to use resources to ensure residents attained and maintained their highest physical well-being. The facility's Administrator and the Director of Nursing (DON) failed to identify failures from nursing and other facility staff, which caused the actual harm and/or death of residents. 1. The facility's administration failed to ensure that residents' physicians and/or other medical providers were notified after R159 and R9 had changes in conditions related to the worsening of their skin conditions. Cross Reference F580-J 2. The facility's administration failed to ensure residents were free from neglect and abuse. Nursing staff neglected to identify and/or report the worsening of R159's and R9's skin conditions, which led to actual harm and death. Additionally, the facility failed to protect R360 from being abused by R46, even though the facility documented copious notes where R46 abused multiple other residents. Cross Reference F600-J 3. The facility's administration failed to…

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

  Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-06 · 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility policy titled Infection Control, Categories of, the facility failed to ensure staff implemented appropriate infection prevention and control practices related to Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) for one of 13 residents (R) (R8) on EBP. This deficient practice had the potential to increase the risk for transmission of infectious organisms to other residents and staff.Findings include:Review of the Electronic Health Record (EHR) revealed R8 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with the diagnoses, including but not limited to, Parkinson's disease, hypertensive heart failure, dementia, need for assistance for personal care, and hypokalemia.Review of the Treatment Administration Record (TAR) for R8 dated May 2026, documented but not limited to treatment for a wound to the coccyx and a sacral wound. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for R8 dated 03/04/2026, revealed a Basic Interview for Mental Status score of 99,…

  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 · Fcited before2025-03-30 · tag F0809 — failed to serve meals on a reasonable schedule — widespread
  Ensure meals and snacks are served at times in accordance with resident’s needs, preferences, and requests. Suitable and nourishing alternative meals and snacks must be provided for residents who want to eat at non-traditional times or outside of scheduled meal times.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations, interviews, record review, and a review of the facility's policy titled Menu Planning, the facility failed to ensure there was not more than a 14-hour gap between the evening meal (dinner) and breakfast the following day for 99 out of 101 residents (two residents received nutrition via tube feeding). The planned meal gap between dinner and breakfast the following day was 15 hours. A substantial evening snack was not provided, and the resident group had not approved of the 15-hour gap between dinner and breakfast. This created the potential for residents to experience hunger while waiting for breakfast. Findings included: A review of the undated Menu Planning policy revealed, Menus are written in advance to include at least three meals daily at regular times. The facility did not have a policy more specific to mealtimes and how much time could elapse between dinner and breakfast. A review of the undated Mealtimes document, provided by the facility, revealed breakfast was scheduled to be served at 8:00 am in the Main Dining Room, 8:15 am on A Hall, and 8:30 am…

  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 · Fcited before2025-03-30 · 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, interviews, record review, and a review of the facility's policy titled Policy: Hand Washing, the facility failed to maintain and practice food service principles in the kitchen in a manner to prevent the potential spread of food borne illness for 99 out of 101 total residents (two residents received nutrition via tube feeding). Specifically, staff did not adhere to hand hygiene principles when touching ready-to-eat food on the tray line; there was condensation between stacked plastic cups stored as clean; and labeling was inconsistent, making it difficult to determine when to discard leftover food. Findings included: A review of the facility's undated dietary department policy titled Policy: Hand Washing revealed, When to wash hands. After handling soiled equipment or utensils, during food preparation, as often as necessary to remove soil and contamination and to prevent cross-contamination when changing tasks. Before donning gloves for working with food, after engaging in other activities that contaminate the hands. A review of the facility's undated 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.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2025-03-30 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — widespread
  Dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations, interviews, and a review of the facility's policy titled Waste Disposal, the facility failed to ensure the dumpster area was maintained in a sanitary manner to prevent harborage of pests. This had the potential to affect 101 of 101 residents who resided at the facility. There was garbage on the ground around the dumpster and strewn along the edge of the parking area for three days of the survey. The dumpster door was open, and a bag, stuck in the lid, hung outside the dumpster. Findings included: A review of the undated Waste Disposal policy revealed, All garbage will be disposed of daily and as needed throughout the day. Trash will be deposited into a sealed container outside the premises. Dietary will maintain the cleanliness of the surrounding area. During an observation on 3/25/2025 at 10:30 am, the garbage dumpster area was noted with two dumpsters, one for garbage and one for cardboard. Garbage was strewn around the dumpsters in the parking lot and along the grass edge of the parking lot for approximately 100 feet. Garbage included numerous cigarette…

  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 · F2025-03-30 · tag F0848 — widespread
  Provide a neutral and fair arbitration process and agree to arbitrator and venue.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interviews, record review, and review of the Arbitration Agreement, the facility failed to ensure that the Arbitration Agreement presented to residents and resident representatives during admission included a clause that a mutually convenient venue for the Arbitration would be selected. This failure had the potential to affect 101 of 101 residents who had signed the Arbitration Agreement and future residents who might sign the agreement. Findings included: A review of the undated Agreement to Resolve Disputes by Binding Arbitration provided by the facility revealed that the agreement did not provide for the selection of a venue that is convenient and agreeable to both parties. A review of The Bell Minor Home Resident List Report dated 3/25/2025 and provided by the facility revealed the facility had 101 residents in-house. During an interview on 3/25/2025 at 10:30 am, the Administrator stated every resident had signed the arbitration agreement in the admission packet upon admission, but no arbitrations had been conducted since 9/16/2019. During an interview on 3/28/2025 at…

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

  Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-03-30 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — pattern
  Ensure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, interviews, and the policy titled Medication Monitoring Medication Regimen Review and Reporting the facility failed to ensure the physician responded timely to the pharmacist's recommendations made during the monthly drug regimen reviews for four of five residents (R) (R2, R21, R77, and R63) reviewed for unnecessary medication. Findings included: A review of the facility's Medication Monitoring Medication Regimen Review and Reporting policy dated January 2024, Resident-specific MRR [Medication Regimen Review] recommendations and findings are documented and acted upon by the nursing care center and/or physician. The nursing care center follows up on the recommendations to verify that appropriate action has been taken. Recommendations should be acted upon within 30 calendar days or per facility-specific protocols. For those issues that require physician intervention, the attending physician either accepts and acts upon the report and recommendations or rejects all or some of the report 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.

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-03-30 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — pattern
  Ensure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations, interviews, record reviews, and a review of the facility's policy titled Test Tray, the facility failed to ensure the food was palatable for five out of 40 sampled residents (R) (R72, R31, R10, R14, and R30) and for residents who attended resident council meetings. Specifically, the food was not served at palatable temperatures; the food was bland; leftovers were routinely served in place of freshly prepared food; and condiments such as salt, pepper, sugar, and sugar substitute were not served in accordance with the menu. Findings included: A policy for food palatability was requested, and the undated Test Tray policy was provided by the facility. Review of the Test Tray policy revealed the facility would audit meal trays to ensure proper temperatures and acceptable quality of all foods served. Standards included residents being served their trays within 20 minutes of assembly. The standard for food temperatures on the tray 20 minutes after dishing up the trays was: 150 degrees Fahrenheit (F) for soup; 130 degrees F for the entrée, starch, and vegetable, 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.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-03-30 · tag F0637 — isolated
  Assess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
  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 a review of the facility policy titled MDS Submissions, the facility failed to complete a Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment following the initiation of hospice services for one of two sampled residents (R) (R62) reviewed for hospice services. Findings included: A review of the facility's undated MDS Submissions policy revealed, Our facility will conduct and submit resident assessments in accordance with current federal and state submission timeframes . Submission timeframes for the MDS records will be consistent with the requirements for submission as provided in the MDS RAI [Resident Assessment Instrument] Manual. A review of the online MDS 3.0 RAI Manual dated 2023 revealed that the facility must complete a significant change MDS within 14 days after there has been a significant change in the resident's physical or mental condition. A significant change in MDS is required when a resident enrolls in a hospice program. A review of the electronic medical…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-03-30 · tag F0638 — isolated
  Assure that each resident’s assessment is updated at least once every 3 months.
  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, a review of the facility policy titled MDS Submissions, and review of Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Long-Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) User's Manual, the facility failed to ensure that quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments were completed at least once every three months for three of 52 residents (R) (R18, R36, and R65). This failure placed the residents at risk for unmet care needs due to the lack of a timely assessment to track any changes in the residents' status. Findings included: A review of the facility's policy titled MDS Submissions dated January 2023 revealed, Our facility will conduct and submit resident assessments in accordance with current federal and state submission timeframes. A review of the RAI (Resident Assessment Instrument) Manual dated 10/1/2024 revealed The Quarterly assessment is an OBRA [Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act] non-comprehensive assessment for a resident that must be completed at least every 92…

  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 · D2025-03-30 · tag F0641 — isolated
  Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
  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 a policy titled, MDS Assessment Coordinator, the facility failed to ensure that the Minimum Data Sets (MDS) assessments were accurate for two of 40 sampled residents (R)(R104 and R9) related to (1) not coding the presence of R104's pressure ulcer (to the sacrum) on a significant change MDS assessment; and (2) accurately coding the stage of the sacrum pressure ulcer on a subsequent quarterly MDS assessment for R9's diabetic foot ulcer. Findings included: A review of the facility's policy titled MDS Assessment Coordinator policy, dated January 2023, revealed that Each individual who completes a portion of the assessment (MDS) must certify the accuracy of that portion of the assessment. A review of the RAI (Resident Assessment Instrument) Manual, dated 10/1/2024 revealed that It is important to note here that information obtained should cover the same observation period as specified by the Minimum Data Set (MDS) items on the assessment and should be validated for accuracy…

  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

“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

$74,979 in federal fines across 2 penalties.

• $70,421 — penalty dated 2025-03-30
• $4,558 — penalty dated 2024-02-06

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 WELLINGTON HEALTH CARE SERVICES — 14 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

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

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 10 rows in the source record cover these 6 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

3 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.

This home reported $552K 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 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