New Horizons Limestone
2020 Beverly Road NE, Gainesville, GA 30501 · Non profit - Corporation · 142 certified beds · (770) 219-8600 Medicare & Medicaid certified
On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (22% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 4 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 12.6% | 15.3% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 4.2% | 5.6% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 3.1% | 0.9% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.3% | 2.5% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 3.1% | 11.3% | 6.5% | better |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 3.0% | 3.2% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 21.9% | 15.2% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 12.5% | 20.5% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 95.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 6.8% | 5.6% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 20.6% | 15.8% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 2.6% | 19.9% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.3% | 2.6% | 1.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 90.0% | 78.4% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 17.9% | 25.0% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 9.9% | 11.6% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.53 | 2.15 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.73 | 1.90 | 1.80 | better |
§ 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.
59.6% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 90 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 23.0% 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 74 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 0.49 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 80% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 11% 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
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 59.6%CMS range 47.1–67.9 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.0%CMS range 7.6–14.0 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 23.0% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 27.0% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 25.7% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 96.8% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 65.8% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not 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 stay | 1.1% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 2.1% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 6.3%CMS range 3.9–10.6 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.80 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
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 4.07 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.547 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.39 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 3.58 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.26 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.63 to 0.34 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 22% is below 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.
11 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-03-12 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — patternProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, record reviews, and review of the facility policy titled Oxygen Administration, Transport and Storage - Patient Care, the facility failed to ensure that oxygen (O2) therapy was administered according to physician's orders for two residents (R) (R9 and R180) of 27 residents reviewed for oxygen use. The deficient practice had the potential to increase the residents' risk of respiratory complications and adverse clinical outcomes. Findings Include: Review of the facility's undated policy titled Oxygen Administration, Transport and Storage – Patient Care, documented in section for oxygen administration A physician or advanced practice professional (APP) order is required prior to administering oxygen. The policy specifies that the order must include: a. The oxygen delivery device b. The liter flow and/or oxygen concentration (percentage). 1. Record review of the electronic medical record (EMR) revealed R9 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and pertinent diagnoses including but…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-12 · tag F0554 — isolatedAllow 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, record review, staff interviews, and review of facility policy titled, Self-Administration of Medications, the facility failed to ensure two residents (R) (R130 and R57) could safely self-administration medications by leaving medications at the bedside unsupervised. This deficient practice had the potential to increase the risk of clinical complications. Findings include: Record review of the facility's policy titled, Self-Administration of Medications, revealed under section titled, III Policy, if a resident requests to self-administer medication (s) it is the responsibility of the interdisciplinary team (IDT) to determine that it is safe before the resident exercises that right. The policy further states that, A resident may only self-administer medications after the IDT has determined medications may be self-administered. The policy requires consideration of the resident's cognitive status, ability to follow directions, understanding of medications, and ability to ensure medications 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.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-12 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, staff and resident interviews, record review, and review of the facility's policy titled Care Plan - LTC - Patient Care, the facility failed to develop and implement comprehensive, person-centered care plan for one resident (R) (R9) of 60 sampled residents. Specifically, the facility failed to develop and implement care plan interventions related to oxygen administration. This deficient practice had the potential to result in inadequate monitoring and improper oxygen administration, which could compromise the resident's health and safety.Findings include:Review of the undated facility policy titled Care Plan - LTC - Patient Care, documented in Section III Policy Do not leave blanks or incomplete sections. Further review revealed that Complete the . Care Plan based on . provider orders and .documents the resident's immediate problems that require nursing care interventions and will guide the delivery of nursing care.Record review of the electronic medical record (EMR) revealed R9 was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-12 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, review of manufacturer package inserts, and facility policy titled Medication Storage, the facility failed to ensure proper medication labeling, expiration dating, discard procedures, and secure storage for one of eight medication carts. This deficient practice had the potential to place residents at risk for administration of expired, improperly labeled, or unsecured medications, which could compromise resident health and safety. Findings Include: Review of the facility's policy titled Medication Storage, dated 8/22/2023, documented All medication storage areas will inspected. to ensure that all medications are being properly and safely stored in accordance with manufacturer's instructions. IN addition, documented in section Procedures III. All expired. medications are segregated until they are removed from the organization. Outdated. medications will be kept in a designated area until they are returned to the supplier. and Item XVI. B. Medications stored throughout the center must be stored in accordance with manufacturer's instructions.to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2025-02-13 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, staff interviews, record review, and review of facility's policy titled, Nutrition Food and Supply Storage Procedures, Facility A failed to properly discard expired food items, label food items with expiration dates, and properly refrigerate opened food items. This deficient practice had the potential to result in foodborne illness affecting 77 out of 82 residents who receive food orally at Facility A. Findings include: Record review of facilities policy titled, Nutrition Food and Supply Storage Procedures dated 7/1/2023, under section titled, Purpose revealed, All food, non-food items and supplies used in food preparation shall be stored in such manner as to prevent contamination to maintain the safety and wholesomeness of the food for human consumption. (A.) General Storage .2. The use-by date is the last date that a food can be consumed; do not sell products in retail areas or place on patient trays/resident plates past the date on the product. Foods past the use-by date should be…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-13 · tag F0554 — isolatedAllow 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, resident and staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility's policy titled Resident Self-Administration of Medication, Facility A failed to adequately assess one out of 60 sampled residents (R) (R71) for self-administration of medication. This had the potential to result in serious health complications, including medication misuse or overdose, and compromise the safety and well-being of the resident. Findings include: A review of the facility's policy titled Resident Self-Administration of Medication, dated 7/1/2023 under section titled Purpose revealed, The purpose of the Self-Administration of Medication Policy is to develop guidelines about facility staff expectations in the nursing home to honor resident's request for Self-Administration of Medications whenever assessed as appropriate to keep resident at their highest level of functioning. Under the section titled Policy revealed, If a resident requests to self-administer medication(s), it is the responsibility of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-13 · tag F0625 — isolatedNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
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 interview, record review, review of the facility's document titled, [Name] Bed Hold Notice Facility B failed to provide a written bed hold notices for one out of two residents (R) (R179) reviewed for hospitalization. This failure had the potential to place R179 at risk of possible denial of re-admission and loss of their room following a transfer to the hospital. The sample size was 60 residents. Findings include: Review of the facility's document titled, [Name] Bed Hold Notice dated 2/10/2025 under the section titled Please provide to the Resident or Representative revealed, Please review the information provided below to understand the financial obligations related to your decision to hold or release your bed at [Name of facility] Under the section titled Bed Hold Details revealed, Medicaid will provide payment for residents for up to seven nights of bed hold during hospitalization. Medicaid residents are provided up to eight days per year of Therapeutic leave (other than hospitalization). If a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-13 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, staff interviews and record review, Facility B failed to ensure that one of 14 residents (R) (R150) receiving respiratory therapy, nebulizer mask was covered or properly stored. This deficient practice had the potential to put R150 at risk for increased respiratory infections. Findings include: Review of the electronic health records (EHR) revealed, R150 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses of chronic obstruction pulmonary disease (COPD), chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia (reduced oxygen in the blood), acid reflex, and chest congestions. Review of R150's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed, Section C (Cognitive Patterns) a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14 which indicated his cognition was intact; Section O (Special Treatments and Programs) revealed, R64 received oxygen therapy. Review of R150's physicians orders revealed, orders for albuterol (Proventil) 2.5 milligrams (mg)/ 3 milliliters (mL) (0.083 percent) nebulizer solution 2.5 mg;…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-13 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, staff interviews, and a review of the facility's policy titled Laboratory Services-12-1022-POC Glucose Testing with [Name] Glucometer, Facility A failed to discard expired Glucometer Control Solution Level 3, that was stored in one of four medication carts (Hall 300 medication cart). This deficiency created a risk of the expired solution being used, potentially compromising the accuracy and functionality of the glucometer, which could lead to unreliable blood glucose readings. Review of the undated facility policy Laboratory Services-12-1022-POC Glucose Testing with [Name] Glucometer under the section titled III. Equipment and Supplies revealed, D. [Name] glucose control solutions: Levels 1 and 3 .2. Unopened reagent bottles are good until the expiration dated printed on the container. 3. When opened, the bottles are good for 90 days or until the manufacturer's expiration date, whichever comes first. MUST BE LABELED WITH NEW EXPIRATION DATE. An observation on [DATE] 8:20 am of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-09-01 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide 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, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure that activities of daily living (ADL) care was provided for two dependent residents (R) (R#482 and R#60) related to baths/showers. R#482 and R#60 resided in Facility B. The sample size was 70. Findings include: 1. Review of the medical record revealed R#482 was admitted to the facility 12/15/21, with the diagnoses to include but not limited to, colonic mass, right tibia/fibula fracture, stage V chronic kidney disease with dialysis, end stage renal disease (ESRD), diabetes (DM), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Interview on 8/30/22 at 11:24 a.m., R#482 revealed that she had not received a shower in the last two weeks. Review of the shower log and electronic documentation revealed that R#482 received a bath/shower on 5/31/22, 6/9/22, 6/16/22, 6/28/22, 7/5/22, 7/12/22, 7/16/22, 7/26/22, 7/28/22, 8/2/22, 8/9/22 and refusal on 8/30/22. Further review of records revealed that R#482 was admitted to the hospital on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-09-01 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to provide evidence that restorative nursing services were provided for passive range of motion (PROM) and active range of motion (AROM) as recommended by Physical Therapy (PT) and Occupational Therapy (OT) for bilateral upper extremities (BUE) and for splint or brace for one Resident (R) (R#113) of one reviewed for restorative nursing. R#113 resided in Facility B. The sample size was 70. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed that R#113 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of traumatic quadriplegia, swelling of upper extremities, and complex regional pain syndrome of upper extremities. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating that R#113 is cognitively intact. The MDS revealed he is totally dependent requiring two person plus assist for bed mobility and transfers and has limited range of motion in bilateral…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| BURRELL, CAROL | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 02/04/2008 |
| HERDENER, ANTHONY | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 02/04/2008 |
| NICHOLSON, LINDA | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | since 02/04/2008 |
| STEINES, BRIAN | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE OFFICER | since 07/05/2017 |
| BLAIR, STEVEN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 02/01/2014 |
| BLANKENSHIP, LUA | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 02/01/2014 |
| BOWEN, ROBERT | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 02/01/2014 |
| DENT, LARRY | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 02/01/2014 |
| HEARTH, KAYE | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 02/01/2014 |
| HORTENSTINE, JAY | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 02/01/2014 |
| KEENER, JACK | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 02/01/2014 |
| LEWIS, RONALD | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 02/01/2014 |
| MACK, DEBORAH | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 02/01/2014 |
| SCULLY, TIMOTHY | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 02/01/2014 |
| SMITH, RODNEY | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 02/04/2008 |
| SMOOT, JANE | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 02/01/2014 |
| TERRY, JEFFREY | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 02/01/2014 |
| WALLACE, JACQUELYN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 02/01/2014 |
| WAYNE, ALEXANDER | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 02/01/2014 |
| NORTHEAST GEORGIA MEDICAL CENTER, INC. | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 02/04/2008 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 23 rows in the source record cover these 20 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.
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.
What families pay in GA
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Georgia Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 115487. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-03-12, 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.