Westbury Center Of Jackson For Nursing And Healing
922 McDonough Road, Jackson, GA 30233 · For profit - Corporation · 196 certified beds · (770) 775-7832 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Jul 2024
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- the CMS record shows $8,512 in federal fines (most recent 2024-07-12)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
- about 22% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
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) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 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 | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 2 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 1 to 3 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 | 13.1% | 15.3% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 6.2% | 5.6% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.2% | 0.9% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.8% | 2.5% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 9.6% | 11.3% | 6.5% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 4.1% | 3.2% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 18.8% | 15.2% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 23.5% | 20.5% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 95.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 4.9% | 5.6% | 4.7% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 28.2% | 15.8% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 14.7% | 19.9% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 2.6% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 83.7% | 78.4% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 24.3% | 25.0% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 11.3% | 11.6% | 12.0% | typical |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.70 | 2.15 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.99 | 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.
47.6% 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 153 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 48.1% 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 133 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 0.21 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 25% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 12% 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 | 47.6%CMS range 39.4–55.2 | 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 | 10.8%CMS range 8.0–14.2 | 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 | 48.1% | 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 | 48.9% | 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 | 42.9% | 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 | 91.6% | 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 | 100.0% | 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 | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 1.4% | 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 | 3.7% | 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 | 9.2%CMS range 5.5–11.8 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.12 | 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
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 196 beds and averages 189.5 residents a day — about 97% occupied, or roughly 6 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 3.04 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 2.11 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 2.69 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.18 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.34 to 0.15 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 53% 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 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.
- Actual harm · G2024-07-12 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect 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 staff interviews, record review, and a review of the facility policy titled Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation, the facility failed to protect the resident's right to be free from verbal and physical abuse by staff. The Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) forcefully pushed the resident (R) (R1) down, grabbed the wheelchair, and prevented the resident from leaving the room. Psychosocial harm occurred on 7/13/2023 when a CNA voiced racial comments causing R1 to become distraught, scared, and crying. Due to the verbal abuse, R1 left the facility and did not return. Findings include: A facility policy titled, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation, revised 1/2024, revealed policy: It is the policy of this facility to provide protections for the health, welfare and rights of each resident by developing and implementing written policies and procedures that prohibit and prevent abuse, neglect, exploitation and misappropriation of resident property. The policy specified, Abuse means the willful infliction of injury,…
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 F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interviews, and the facility policy titled Infection Prevention and Control Program, the facility failed to maintain sanitary conditions to prevent the transmission of communicable diseases and infections. This deficient practice created a potential for infection and cross contamination for 53 sampled residents (R).Findings Include:Review of the Facility's Infection Prevention and Control Program Policy, implemented on 10/01/2022, showed that the Facility has established and maintains an infection prevention and control program designed to provide safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections as per accepted national standard and guidelines. 11. Linens: a. Laundry and direct care staff shall handle, store, process, and transport linens to prevent spread of infection. b. Clean linen shall be separated from soiled linen at all times. c. Clean linen shall be delivered to resident care units on covered linen carts with covers down. d. Linen shall be stored on all…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-06 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, staff interviews, record reviews, and review of the facility's policy titled Quality of Life- Dignity, the facility failed to provide care in a manner that maintained or enhanced a resident's dignity for one of 53 sampled residents (R) (R37). This failure had the potential to diminish R37's quality of life in an environment that promotes the maintenance or enhancement of each resident's quality of life. Finding include: Review of the facility's policy titled Quality of Life Dignity, dated December 2022, revealed the Policy Statement was Each resident shall be cared for in a manner that promotes and enhances quality of life, dignity, respect and individually. The Policy Interpretation and Implementation section included, 1. Resident shall be treated with dignity and respect at all times. 10. Staff shall promote, maintain, and protect resident privacy, including bodily privacy during assistance with personal care and during treatment procedures. Review of the clinical record revealed R37's…
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 · D2025-02-06 · 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, the facility failed to ensure medications were not left at the bedside of two of 53 sampled residents (R) (R86 and R287) who were not assessed for medication self-administration. This deficient practice had the potential to place R86 and R287 at risk of serious health complications, including medication misuse or overdose, and compromise their safety and well-being. Findings Include: A review of the facility's policy titled Resident Self-Administration of Medication, revised on 3/2024, revealed the Policy section was It is the policy of this facility to support each resident's right to self-administer medication. A resident may only self-administer medications after the facility's interdisciplinary team has determined which medications may be self-administered safely. The Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines section included . 7. Bedside medication…
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 · D2025-02-06 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor 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, record review, and review of the facility-provided document titled Logbook Documentation - Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC)/ Packaged Terminal Air Conditioner (PTAC): Clean Air Filters, the facility failed to ensure that the PTAC filters were maintained in a clean condition for two of 120 resident rooms (rooms [ROOM NUMBERS] ). In addition, the facility failed to maintain a home-like environment in two of 120 resident rooms (rooms [ROOM NUMBERS]) observed with chipped paint and loose baseboards. These deficient practices had the potential to place the residents residing in the rooms at risk of living in an unsanitary and unsafe living environment and a potential for diminished quality of life. Findings include: Review of the facility-provided document titled Logbook Documentation - HVAC (PTAC): Clean Air Filters revealed the Steps section included: 1. Remove or open access cover 2. Remove air filter and inspect for cleanliness. If filter is dirty either…
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 · D2025-02-06 · tag F0645 — isolatedPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility policy titled Resident Assessment-Coordination with PASARR (Preadmission Screening and Resident Review) Program, the facility failed to submit an application for Level II PASARR for evaluation and determination of specialized services for three of four residents (R) (R32, R87, and R90) reviewed for PASARR. This failure had the potential to place R32, R87, and R90 at risk of not receiving services and/or care according to their needs. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Resident Assessment-Coordination with PASARR Program, date reviewed/revised December 2022, revealed the Policy stated, This facility coordinates assessments with the preadmission screening and resident review (PASARR) program under Medicaid to ensure that individuals with a mental disorder, intellectual disability, or a related condition receive care and services in the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs. The Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines section included, 1. All applicants to this facility will 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 · D2025-02-06 · 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, resident and staff interviews, record review, and a review of the facility-provided binder titled Rehab: Patient Level of Assistance, the facility failed to ensure restorative nursing care was provided to one of two residents (R) (R99) sampled for range of motion (ROM) and mobility. This deficient practice had the potential to place R99 at risk of worsening contractures and a diminished quality of life. Findings include: Review of the facility-provided binder titled Rehab: Patient Level of Assistance, revealed instructions on the level of assistance required for each resident in the facility. The binder contained a Restorative Nursing Instruction Form, completed by Occupational Therapy (OT) and/or Physical Therapy (PT), which documented each resident's needs of ROM, ambulation, transfers, splinting/bracing, eating/swallowing, and other activity of daily living (ADL) needs. Review of R 99's admission Record revealed diagnoses including, but not limited to, contracture of muscle of left…
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 · D2025-02-06 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility's policy titled Insulin Pen, the facility failed to ensure the medication error rate was less than five percent. There were two errors with 30 opportunities for two of four residents, R (R119 and R147), for a medication error rate of 6.67 percent. These failures had the potential to place R119 and R147 at risk of medical complications and decreased therapeutic effects of medications. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Insulin Pen, revised 8/2023, revealed the Policy section included . 17. Keep the pen straight and insert the needle into the skin. Using your thumb, press the injection button all the way down. When the number in the window returns to '0,' slowly count to 10 before removing the needle. 1. Review of R119's clinical record revealed diagnoses including, but not limited to, type 2 diabetes mellitus with diabetic chronic kidney disease. Review of R119's Physician's Orders revealed an order dated 9/28/2024 for insulin glargine 100 units/milliliter (ml) solution (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 · D2024-07-12 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately 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
Based on staff interviews, record review, and a review of the facility policy titled Notification of Changes, the facility failed to notify the resident's representative of a change in the resident's condition for 1 of 3 sampled residents (R) (R5) reviewed for notification of change in condition. Findings included: A facility policy titled, Notification of Changes, revised date of 1/2024, revealed Policy: The purpose of this policy is to ensure the facility promptly informs the resident, consults the resident's physician, and notifies, consistent with his or her authority, the resident's representative when there is a change requiring notification. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 12/26/2023, revealed R5 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13, which indicated the resident had intact cognition. Review of the care plan for R5, initiated on 12/21/2023, revealed the resident was new to the facility. Interventions directed the staff to notify the resident's family of changes in the resident's condition. 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 · D2023-08-31 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure 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
Based on observation, staff interviews, record review, and a review of the facility's policy titled, Insulin Pen, the facility failed to maintain professional nursing standards of quality, as evidenced by one Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) administering insulin to one of 55 Residents (R) (#14) without priming pen prior to administration. Finding include: A review of the facility policy titled Insulin Pen, last reviewed/revised August 2023, revealed the Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines numbered: 6. Insulin pens will be primed prior to each use to avoid collection of air in the insulin reservoir. 11. h. Prime the insulin pen: i. Dial two units by turning the dose selector clockwise. ii. With the needle pointing up, push the plunger, and watch to see that at least one drop of insulin appears on the tip of the needle. If not, repeat until at least one drop appears. A review of the manufacturer's instructions for Humalog Kwik Pen on page three and section titled Priming your Pen stated: If you do not prime before each injection, you may get too much or too little insulin.…
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 before2023-08-31 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, staff interviews, record reviews, and a review of the facility's policies titled Peripheral Intravenous Catheter Insertion, Maintenance, and Removal, Nebulizer Therapy, and Cleaning and Disinfection of Resident-Care Items and Equipment, the facility failed to maintain infection control standard precautions by not removing an intravenous (IV) access timely after discontinuation of the IV antibiotic for one Resident (R) (#8) of three with an IV site, not keeping nebulizer mask enclosed inside a bag when not in use for one of one Resident (R) (#39), and not cleaning or disinfecting equipment between residents who were COVID-19 positive for two residents (room [ROOM NUMBER] A/B) reviewed for Transmission Based Precautions (TBP). Findings Include: 1. Review the policy titled Nebulizer Therapy revised date March 2023 revealed Section Care of the Equipment line number seven states, Once completely dry, store the nebulizer cup and the mouthpiece in a zip lock bag. Observation on 08/29/2023 10:20…
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
$8,512 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $8,512 — penalty dated 2024-07-12
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 EMPIRE CARE CENTERS — 20 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 →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 3 of 5 | 1.9 | +1.1 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 4 of 5 | 2.2 | +1.8 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 1.5 | -0.5 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 3 of 5 | 3.0 | ≈ chain avg |
The other 19 homes this chain runs (chain average 1.9★, per CMS)
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
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWERDLOFF, ARYEH | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/01/2021 |
| DONATH, BARRY | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 06/07/2021 |
| HELLER, SHLOMO | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/01/2021 |
| NUSSBAUM, EPHRAIM | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/01/2021 |
| EMPIRE CARE CENTERS LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/06/2026 |
| CHECK, PAUL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/24/2022 |
| COLEMAN, ALLISON | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/19/2021 |
| COLLEY, STACEY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/06/2025 |
| ELLIS, RENEE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/01/2021 |
| FEARS, YOLANDA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/01/2021 |
| HARDY, LEANTHONY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/01/2021 |
| LADSON, GWENDOLYN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 04/05/2023 |
| REED, JOEL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/01/2023 |
| RIDGEWAY, JULIA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 12/13/2021 |
| RIDLEY, KIM | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/01/2021 |
| SONE-EBELOUE, GLADYS | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/01/2021 |
| STEPHENS, CARRIE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/09/2025 |
| VALENTIN, LISSETTE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2022 |
| ENSH CONSULTING LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/01/2021 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 41 rows in the source record cover these 19 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.
2 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.
About 71% 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 $4.2M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 22% 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
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 115563. 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.