Delmar Gardens Of Gwinnett
3100 Club Drive, Lawrenceville, GA 30044 · For profit - Corporation · 67 certified beds · (770) 923-3100 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (16) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
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 | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 2 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 | 2 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 1 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 2 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 | 22.2% | 15.3% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 7.4% | 5.6% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.9% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 4.5% | 2.5% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 11.3% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 6.6% | 3.2% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 21.3% | 15.2% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 4.7% | 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 | 4.6% | 5.6% | 4.7% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 11.8% | 15.8% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 33.6% | 19.9% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 2.0% | 2.6% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 93.8% | 78.4% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 23.5% | 25.0% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 17.2% | 11.6% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.27 | 2.15 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 2.04 | 1.90 | 1.80 | worse |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
58.9% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 137 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 38.6% 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 44 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 0.43 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 72% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 16% 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 | 58.9%CMS range 51.2–67.1 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 11.4%CMS range 7.9–15.1 | 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 | 38.6% | 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 | 45.5% | 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 | 38.6% | 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 | 93.7% | 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 | 90.0% | 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 | 92.3% | 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 | 0.0% | 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 | 0.0% | 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 | 6.5%CMS range 3.4–10.5 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.79 | 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 67 beds and averages 60.5 residents a day — about 90% occupied, or roughly 6 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.12 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.64 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.54 to 0.20 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 45% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
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.
16 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 6 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · F2025-08-14 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — widespreadHave a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview, and review of the Payroll-Based Journal (PBJ) Staffing Data [NAME] Report 1705D Fiscal Year (FY) Quarter 2 (January 1 - March 31), the facility failed to provide the services of a Registered Nurse (RN) for at least eight consecutive hours a day, seven days a week for three days in February 2025, and one day in March 2025.Findings include:Review of the most recent PBJ Staffing Data Report CASPER Report 1705D FY Quarter 1 2024 (January 1 - March 31) revealed the facility triggered for No RN Hours which indicated four or more days within the Quarter with no RN hours for the following dates: 2/1/2025, 2/15/2025, 2/16/2025, and 3/1/2025.Review of the payroll Employee Timecards, revealed Registered Nurse (RN) CC worked on 2/15/2025 for (6.0 hours), 2/1/2025 (0.00 hours), 2/16/2205 (0.00 hours), and 3/1/2025 (0.00 hours).Review of the Daily Staffing Schedule dated 2/1/2025, 2/16/2025, and 3/1/2025 revealed there were no RNs scheduled for 1st, 2nd, or 3rd shift.Review of the Facility Two-Week Staffing Grid for 2/1/2025 through 2/15/2025, 2/16/2025…
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 before2025-08-14 · 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
Based on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to follow the care plan for one of 33 sampled residents (R) (R4) related to oxygen (O2) therapy. In addition, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive, person-centered care plan for one of 33 sampled Rs (R55) related to Percutaneous Intravenous Centralized Catheter (PICC) line dressing.Findings include: 1. Review of the Physicians Orders for R4 documented oxygen per nasal cannula (NC) at (4) liters per minute (LPM), continuous. During an observation on 8/12/2025 at 10:18 am and 8/13/2025 at 10:26 am revealed R4's O2 concentration was set at 5 LPM. Review of the care plan revealed R4 has potential for complications of signs and symptoms related to a diagnosis of COPD, asthma, and chronic respiratory failure; R4 is O2 dependent with interventions to administer oxygen as order by Doctor of Medicine (MD). Interview on 8/14/2025 at 11:59 am with the Director of Nursing (DON) revealed she expected her staff to follow the resident care plan and when it is updated as well. 2. A review of R55's care plan last edited…
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 · D2025-08-14 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
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 policies titled, 'Name of Facility' Infusion Policy and Procedure Manual-Midline/Central Line Dressing Change and Physician Orders, Following, the facility failed to ensure physician orders were followed for two of 33 sampled residents (R) (R55 and R6). The deficient practice had the potential for R55 and R6 to experience medical complications. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled 'Name of Facility' Infusion Policy and Procedure Manual- Midline/Central Line Dressing Change last revised June 2023 revealed under Considerations: .4) Gauze dressings are changed every 2 days. 5) Transparent semi-permeable membrane (TSM) dressing is changed every 5 to 7 days. Review of the policy titled Physician Orders, Following effective date June 29, 2021, revealed under Purpose: It is the policy of the community to ensure that all Licensed Professional Nurses (RN/LPN/LVN) and other Healthcare Professionals, follow…
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 · D2025-08-14 · 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, record review, and review of the facility policy titled, Oxygen Administration, the facility failed to deliver oxygen (O2) per physician order for one of 4 residents (R) (R4) receiving O2 therapy. The deficient practice had the potential to cause respiratory distress.Findings include:Review of the facility policy titled Oxygen Administration dated July 2016 revealed under Note: You must have a physician's order to apply oxygen.Under ADMINISTRATION OF CANNULA: .5. Adjust flow to ordered rate. Review of the electronic medical record (EMR) for R4 revealed she was admitted to the facility with diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (airflow blockage and breathing problems), asthma, and chronic respiratory failure (insufficient oxygen),and unspecified whether with hypoxia (lack of oxygen supply) or hypercapnia (increase in carbon dioxide). Review of the most recent quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed R4 had a Brief…
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 · Fcited before2024-04-16 · 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, interviews, record review, and review of the facility's policies titled, Food Storage Dry/Refrigerated/Frozen and Labeling/Dating Foods (Date Marking), the facility failed to ensure opened food items were properly dated and labeled in the cooler, freezer, and dry food pantry. In addition, the facility failed to ensure the oven and ice machines were clean, all dietary staff were wearing appropriate hair covering, and the recipe for pureed food was followed. This deficient practice had the potential to affect 58 of 58 residents who received an oral diet from the kitchen. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Food Storage Dry/Refrigerated/Frozen, 2014 Edition, under Procedure: 1. General storage guidelines to be followed: revealed, All food items will be labeled Discard food that has passed the expiration date and discard food that has been prepared in the facility after seven days of storing under proper refrigeration. Review of the facility's policy titled Labeling/Dating…
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 · F2024-04-16 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — widespreadDispose of garbage and refuse properly.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of two dumpsters had a plug in place and the surrounding area around the dumpster was free of trash and debris. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all residents. The census was 58 residents. Findings include: During an observation of the dumpster on 4/14/2024 at 10:15 am with the Dietary Manager (DM) revealed, the dumpster on the right side had the appropriate plug. However, the dumpster on the left was unplugged and did not have a cap on it. There was trash observed on the ground in the back of the dumpster including soiled diapers. The DM began to pick the trash up at this time and put it in the dumpster. During an interview on 4/15/2024 at 5:50 pm the Administrator revealed she expect staff to have a system in place to take care of problems. This process should be taken to the Quality Assurance (QA) meeting. During an observation of the dumpsters on 4/16/2024 at 10:00 am the Maintenance Director (MD) revealed the dumpsters would be changed out that day. (MD) verified 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 · F2024-04-16 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — widespreadKeep all essential equipment working safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the flat top oven was working. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure the oven door would close efficiently to prepare cooked meals. This deficient practice had the potential to affect 58 of 58 residents who received an oral diet from the kitchen. Findings include: Record review of the Nursing Home Maintenance work orders from 2/14/2024 through 4/13/2024 revealed there was no order to repair the oven located in the kitchen. During an interview and tour of the kitchen on 4/13/2024 at 8:30 am with the Chef, the flat top stove oven was observed not clean with old grease and food particles in the oven. There was a towel pushed between the top of the door and stove which was used to keep the door closed. An interview with the Chef revealed the door was broken and that they would remove the towel when the oven was used. The Chef stated he had discussed the oven door with the Maintenance Director (MD). During an interview on 4/15/2024 at 11:00 am with the MD, revealed he fixed the broken oven 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-04-16 · tag F0644 — isolatedCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as 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 staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility's policy titled, Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) Program the facility failed to ensure a Level II PASARR was conducted for one of two sampled residents (R) (R21) reviewed for PASARR. Specifically, the facility failed to refer R21 to the appropriate state-designated authority for a Level II evaluation following a mental illness diagnosis. Findings include: Review of the undated facility's policy titled, Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) Program revealed It is the policy of the facility to assure that all residents admitted to the facility receive a Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review, in accordance with State and Federal Regulations. 3. Preadmission Screening for individuals with a mental disorder. The facility will not admit any new residents with a. Mental disorder, unless the State mental health authority has determined, based on an independent physical and mental evaluation performed by 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 before2024-04-16 · 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 record review, staff interviews, and review of the facility's policy titled Care Plan Conference, Interdisciplinary, the facility failed to follow the individualized care plan for monitoring for side effects of anticoagulant drug use for two residents (R) (R27 and R31). The sample size was 25. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Care Plan Conference, Interdisciplinary revised 5/2021 indicated the STANDARD is an Interdisciplinary Care Planning Conference identifies resident needs and establishes obtainable goals. An appropriate plan of action is designed to ensure optimal levels of activity and independence for all residents. The purpose is the resident care plan is conducted according to the procedures established. Number 5. Care plan is completed in the RAI section of the electronic health record. Procedure Number 10. The care plan coordinator or the appropriate discipline updates the resident care plan and the resident profile at each Interdisciplinary Conference. 1. Review 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 · D2024-04-16 · tag F0745 — failed to provide medically-related social services — isolatedProvide medically-related social services to help each resident achieve the highest possible quality of life.
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 and resident interviews, record review, review of the facility's policy titled Treatment/Devices to Maintain Hearing/Vision and review of the facility's document titled Job Description Director of Social Service, the facility failed to provide three out of five sampled residents (R) (R21, R30, and R7) reviewed for adequate assistance and support from social service with receiving vision care. In addition, R21 was hard of hearing and had not been provided assistance by an audiologist. The failure to adequately address the residents' concern has the potential to affect their quality of life. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Treatment/Devices to Maintain Hearing/Vision dated April, 2024 indicated: It is the policy of the facility to ensure it identifies and provides needed care and services that are resident centered, in accordance with the resident's preferences, goals for care and professional standards of practice that will meet each resident's physical, mental, 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.
Show the remaining 6 citations
- Potential for harm · D2024-04-16 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary 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 observation, record review, staff interviews, and review of facility's policy titled Coumadin Therapy/Dosing Protocol, the facility failed to document monitoring and side effects of anticoagulant use for two of five sampled residents (R) (R27, R31) reviewed for unnecessary medications. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Coumadin Therapy/Dosing Protocol revised 6/2021 defined Coumadin as an anti-coagulant that prevents thrombophlebitis. Coumadin is used to treat deep vein thrombosis, myocardial infarction, pulmonary emboli, heart valve disease and atrial arrhythmia. Consideration of Coumadin Administration: Only licensed nurses will pass all coumadin doses. Procedure: Number 3. Nurses should chart all pertinent information related to Coumadin administration, physician orders and signs and symptoms of hemorrhagic adverse effects as they relate to each resident receiving Coumadin therapy. 1. Review of the clinical record revealed R27 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-04-16 · 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, interviews and review of the facility's policies titled Expiration Dating of Medications and Medications with Shortened Expiration Dates, and review of the Pharmacy Nurse Consultant report, the facility failed to ensure medications were dated appropriately when opened to determine the discard date. In addition, the facility failed to discard expired medical supplies prior to expiration dates in one of three medication carts. The sample size was 25. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Expiration Dating of Medications with effective date April 1, 2016, Procedure: F. Ophthalmic medications will be discarded sixty days after initial dose. The medication will be noted with the date the med was initially opened. G. Nasal medications dispensed by the pharmacy will be discarded sixty days after initial dose. The medication will be noted with the date the med was initially opened. I. Injectable medications dispensed by the pharmacy will be discarded thirty days after initial…
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 · Fcited before2022-12-04 · 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
Based on observations, interviews, and review of the facility policy titled, Trayline Refrigerated Leftover Storage, the facility failed to maintain a clean and sanitary kitchen. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure that food items had an open date and were properly labeled; failed to have the meat slicer and floor stand mixer cleaned and free from food debris to prevent cross contamination; and failed to properly use the three compartments sink to prevent food borne illness. The deficient practice had the potential to affect 56 out of 58 residents (R) receiving an oral diet. Findings include: 1. Review of facility policy titled Trayline Refrigerated Leftover Storage revised 1/1/2014, revealed procedure 2. Date container with use by date. 3. Label unless easily identifiable without removing cover. Observation on 12/2/2022 at 8:55 a.m. of the walk-in freezer revealed a two-pound bag of diced green peppers that was opened with no date. Continued observation revealed an opened brown bag of steak fries that was not securely wrapped, labeled, or dated. Observation on 12/2/2022 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.
- Potential for harm · E2022-12-04 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — patternDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
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, staff interviews and review of facility policy titled Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation, Freedom From, the facility failed to complete a background check screening process for four nursing staff of 10 total staff reviewed. Findings include: The facility policy titled Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation, Freedom From revised September 2022 documented: it is the policy of [NAME] Gardens to maintain a work and living environment that is professional and residents are free from threat or occurrence of harassment, abuse (verbal, physical, mental, or sexual), neglect, corporal punishment involuntary seclusion and misappropriation of property. Application/Prevention: Procedures: A. New employee screening. 3. All potential employees shall have a criminal background check. Review of the facility employee files revealed the following: 1. Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) DD was hired on 9/21/2022 with no background check completed. 2. The Director of Nursing (DON) was hired on 12/28/2020 with no…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-12-04 · 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 record review, observation, staff interviews and review of the facility policy titled, Care Management, the facility failed to develop a person-centered comprehensive care plan for respiratory and oxygen therapy for one of 21 residents (R#58). The deficient practice had the potential to affect the overall implementation of the resident's care. Findings: A review of the facility policy, Care Management, number C-4, effective 12/20/2020, revealed that coordination of the care plan is the nursing responsibility; however, planning, implementation, and evaluation required joint participation from all disciplines. Each resident's plan of care was individualized and would reflect the current need of each resident and undergo review during the resident's stay. Nursing utilized assessment, diagnosis, goal setting, implementation, and evaluation as the guide while establishing the plan of care. A review of the record revealed R#58 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a past medical history of coronary…
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 · D2022-12-04 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
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, staff interview, and review of the facility policy titled, Behaviors Using Person-Centered Care, Accommodating the facility failed to ensure a stop date was implemented, not to exceed 14 days for psychotropic medications for one of five residents (R) (R#31) reviewed for unnecessary medications. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure a stop date was implemented for antianxiety medication ordered as need (PRN) for R#31. Findings includes: Review of the facility policy title Behaviors Using Person-Centered Care, Accommodating revised February 2021, revealed PRN usage of any psychopharmacological agent (including antidepressants) A. Residents must not receive PRN psychotropic medication unless that medication is necessary to treat a diagnosed specific condition that is documented in the clinical record. A PRN order for psychotropic medications should only be limited to 14 days. Physician or prescribing practitioner should document their rationale for continued use if they believe it is…
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.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to DELMAR GARDENS — 12 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 | 2 of 5 | 2.8 | -0.8 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 3.0 | ≈ chain avg |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 2.8 | -1.8 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 2 of 5 | 2.5 | -0.5 vs chain |
The other 11 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.8★, 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 | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DELMAR GARDENS ENTERPRISES INC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 03/14/2003 |
| GABE GROSSBERG AND GEORGE GROSSBERG, TRUSTEES OF THE HENRY AND BARBARA | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 8% | since 03/14/2003 |
| GEORGE GROSSBERG AND GABE GROSSBERG, TRUSTEES OF THE HENRY AND BARBARA | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 8% | since 03/14/2003 |
| GOLDBERG-NOM LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 25% | since 03/14/2003 |
| NON-GST FAMILY TRUST EST U/W OF ISRAEL GOLDBERG FBO JANICE BITANSKI | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 6% | since 04/10/2013 |
| NON-GST FAMILY TRUST ESTABLISHED U/W OF ISRAEL GOLDBERG FBO HARRY ZVI | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 6% | since 04/10/2013 |
| NON-GSTFAMILY TRUST EST U/W ISRAEL GOLDBERG FBO DIANE FREDMAN | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 6% | since 04/10/2013 |
| GROSSBERG, GABE | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER | 16% | since 03/14/2003 |
| GROSSBERG, GEORGE | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 11% | since 03/14/2003 |
| MARX, KENNETH | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 06/11/2019 |
| OPPENHEIMER, HOWARD | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 03/14/2003 |
| DELMAR GARDENS MANAGEMENT SERVICES INC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 04/01/2005 |
| VALLERAY, KALINE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 12/05/2022 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 14 rows in the source record cover these 13 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
8 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 $2.2M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 14% 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 115350. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-08-14, 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.