No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Mesun Health and Rehabilitation Center

88 Johnson Road, Building #2, Lawrenceville, GA 30046 · For profit - Individual · 100 certified beds · (404) 367-1907 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (404) 367-1907 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse/neglect citation on record (F0600) — cited Dec 2023$4,017 in federal fines1 Medicare payment denial
Insights

This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.

Worth asking about
  • it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Dec 2023
  • it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0604, F0605, F0607, F0609, F0610) — 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 (31) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • the CMS record shows $4,017 in federal fines (most recent 2024-07-18)
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
  • 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.

2/5
CMS overall
2 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 2 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 3 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 2 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Urgent care / clinic
696 Grayson Hwy · (770) 963-0927 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
202 Grayson Hwy SW · (770) 963-8183 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
870 New Hope Rd · (770) 962-4226 · Call to confirm hours
Park
100 E Crogan St SE · (678) 277-0890 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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 2 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 1 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.

Overall rating2★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased25.4%15.3%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight4.1%5.6%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.9%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection1.6%2.5%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.9%11.3%6.5%better
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury0.8%3.2%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened12.8%15.2%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication18.6%20.5%18.9%typical
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine92.6%95.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers5.8%5.6%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control23.2%15.8%21.2%typical
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table28.8%19.9%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication1.9%2.6%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine95.8%78.4%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission29.8%25.0%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit11.2%11.6%12.0%typical

§ 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.

57.0% 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 444 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

57.0%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
13.3%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
38.6%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.59U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.25hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.31hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.03hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

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 197 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 0.59 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 87% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 21% 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
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF57.0%CMS range 52.8–61.051.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF13.3%CMS range 11.1–16.110.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024worse than U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge38.6%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 discharge40.1%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge30.5%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 identified59.4%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 setting98.7%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 discharge98.8%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 stay0.4%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened5.7%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.1%CMS range 5.0–9.27.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.911.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS 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

0.55
RN hours/ resident / day
0.82
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.27
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.63
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.43
RN hoursweekends
42.1%
Total nursing turnover
50.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 100 beds and averages 70.3 residents a day — about 70% occupied, or roughly 30 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.63 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.546 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.27 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.38 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.73 on weekdays — 9% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.59 to 0.43 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 42% 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

9
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-11-21)
5
at the previous standard inspection (2024-07-18)

Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. 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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

31 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 21 are one tap away and print in full.

  • Potential for harm · D2025-11-21 · tag F0582 — isolated
    Give residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure deposited monetary funds were returned timely after discharge to the family of one resident (Resident (R) 88) out of a total of 23 residents reviewed in the sample. The facility's failure to ensure funds were returned to the resident's family in a timely manner after her discharge created the potential for the resident/resident's family to experience negative financial outcomes related to their inability to access the funds.Findings include:Review of the facility's undated Refund Policy (incorrectly) indicated, Refunds will be reviewed and issued for Deposits, Prepaid Room and Board, Advance Payments, and Ancillary Services. Approved refund requests will be processed and issued within forty-five [45] days. Review of the admission Record found in the Electronic Medical Record (EMR) under the Profile tab revealed R88 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident's diagnoses included heart failure and early…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-11-21 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — isolated
    Prevent the use of unnecessary psychotropic medications or use medications that may restrain a resident's ability to function.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to protect residents from abuse by ensuring chemical restraints were not used unless medically necessary for two residents (Resident (R)16 and R47) out of a total of six residents reviewed for unnecessary medication. The facility's failure to ensure identified behaviors and potential side effects were consistently monitored for these residents created the potential for the residents to experience side effects related to the administration of unnecessary medication. A total of 23 residents were reviewed in the sample.Findings include:1. Review of the admission Record found in the Electronic Medical Record (EMR) under the Profile tab revealed R16 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident's diagnoses included Parkinson's disease and schizophrenia.Review of R16's Care Plan, dated 7/16/2025 and found in the EMR under the Care Plan tab, indicated the resident had a diagnosis of schizophrenia and was to be given her…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-11-21 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
    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 facility policy review, the facility failed protect residents from abuse by ensuring timely reporting of an allegation of financial abuse for one (Resident (R) 5) out of three residents reviewed for abuse. The facility's failure to ensure timely reporting of the allegation of abuse created the potential for this and other residents to experience ongoing effects related to abuse. A total of 23 residents were reviewed in the sample.Findings include:Review of the facility's Compliance with Reporting Allegation of Abuse/Neglect/Exploitation Policy, dated 12/22/2023, indicated, It is the policy of the facility to report all allegations of abuse/neglect/exploitation or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown sources and misappropriation of resident property immediately to the Administrator of the facility and to other appropriate agencies in accordance with current state and federal regulations within prescribed timeframes and The Administrator or designee will notify…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-11-21 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
    Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to protect residents from abuse by ensuring a thorough investigation into allegations of potential abuse was conducted for two out of three residents (Resident (R) 5 and R3) reviewed for abuse. The facility's failure to ensure thorough investigation of potential financial abuse for R5, and of an injury for R3, created the potential for these and other residents to experience ongoing effects related to abuse. A total of 23 residents were reviewed in the sample.Findings include:Review of the facility policy titled Compliance with Reporting Allegations of Abuse/Neglect/Exploitation, dated 12/22/2023, revealed V. Investigation of Alleged Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation: A. An immediate investigation is warranted when suspicion of abuse, neglect or exploitation, or reports of abuse, neglect or exploitation occur. B. Written procedures for investigations include: . 4. identifying and interviewing all involved persons, including…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-11-21 · tag F0628 — isolated
    Provide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
    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 and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure one resident (Resident (R) 55) and their representative out of one resident reviewed for hospitalization out of a total sample of 23 residents received a written bed hold policy and transfer notice. This failure had the potential to result in the resident and/or their representative not having the knowledge of where and why a resident was transferred and/or how to appeal the transfer, if desired, and had the potential to cause confusion or distress regarding re-admission to the facility.Findings include:Upon request, the facility failed to provide any policies related to the process of transferring a resident to the hospital.Review of R55's Census Record located under the Resident tab in the electronic medical record (EMR) revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had been transferred to the hospital four times in the past ten months.Review of R55's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-11-21 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — isolated
    Provide activities to meet all resident's needs.
    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, observations, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a consistent program of activities was in place for one (Resident (R) 16) out of three residents reviewed for activities. The facility's failure to ensure activities were consistently provided per, and documented according to, R16's assessed preferences created the potential for the resident to experience negative psychosocial effects related to social isolation. A total of 23 residents were reviewed in the sample.Findings include:Review of the facility's Activities Policy, dated 7/9/2020, indicated, It is the policy of the facility to provide an ongoing program to support residents in their choice of activities based on their comprehensive assessment, care plan, and preferences of each resident.Review of the admission Record found in the electronic medical record (EMR) under the Profile tab revealed R16 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident's diagnoses included Parkinson's disease 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-11-21 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
    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 facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure physician orders for the use of an indwelling urinary catheter device were in place for one (Resident (R) 1) of two residents reviewed for urinary catheters. The facility's failure to ensure orders were in place for R1's suprapubic urinary catheter created the potential for the resident to go without appropriate catheter-related care and services. A total of 23 residents were reviewed in the sample.Findings include:Review of the facility's Appropriate Use of Indwelling Catheters Policy, dated September 2024, indicated, The use of an indwelling urinary catheter will be in accordance with physician's orders, which will include the diagnosis or clinical condition making the use of the catheter necessary, size of the catheter, and frequency of change [if applicable]. Review of the admission Record found in the Electronic Medical Record (EMR) under the Profile tab revealed R1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-11-21 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolated
    Ensure 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

    Based on observations, resident, resident family member, and staff interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure clinical criteria were met prior to prescribing and administering an antibiotic for a urinary tract infection (UTI) for one (Resident (R) 79) of one resident reviewed for antibiotic use out of a total sample of 23 residents. This failure had the potential to cause antibiotic resistance, increased risk of Clostridioides difficile infection, and adverse drug reactions.Findings include:Review of the facility policy titled Antibiotic Stewardship Program, dated 9/22/2025, revealed 4. The program includes antibiotic use protocols and a system to monitor antibiotic use. a. Antibiotic use protocols: i. Nursing staff shall assess residents who are suspected to have an infection and notify the physician. ii. Laboratory testing shall be in accordance with current standards of practice. iii. The facility uses the [CDC's [Centers for Disease Control] NHSN [National Healthcare Safety Network] Surveillance Definitions, updated McGeer criteria…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-11-21 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolated
    Ensure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
    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, observations, staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than five percent. Errors were made during the administration of medication for two of seven residents (Resident (R) 85 and R92) observed for medication administration. A total of two errors were made out of 25 opportunities for error, which resulted in an eight percent medication error rate. Medication errors have the potential to result in adverse health outcomes.Findings include:Review of the facility's Medication Administration Policy, dated April 2025, indicated, Ensure that the six rights of medication administration are followed: a. Right resident b. Right drug c. Right dosage d. Right route e. Right time f. Right documentation. 1. Review of the admission Record found in the Electronic Medical Record (EMR) under the Profile tab revealed R85 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident's diagnoses included atrial fibrillation and history of stroke.Review…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2024-07-18 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, staff interviews, and review of the facility's policy titled Food Safety Requirements, the facility failed to ensure food items were properly stored, labeled with expiration dates, and that expired foods were disposed of in a timely manner. The deficient practice had the potential to affect 47 of 49 residents who consumed an oral diet. Findings include: Review of the undated facility's policy titled Food Safety Requirements, under Policy revealed, It is the policy of this facility to procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory by federal, state, and local authorities. Food will also be stored, prepared, distributed and served in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Under Definitions revealed, Food service safety refers to handling, preparing, and storing food in ways that prevent foodborne illness. Under Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines revealed, 1. Food safety practices shall be followed throughout the facility's entire food handling process. This process begins when food is received from the vendor and…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
Show the remaining 21 citations
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-07-18 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespread
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on staff interviews and review of the facility's policies titled, Infection Prevention and Control Program and Water Management, the facility failed to develop an effective water management plan which included routine water management activities to prevent the growth and spread of Legionella and other opportunistic waterborne pathogens throughout the facility's water system. The facility's census was 49 residents. Review of the undated facility's policy titled, Infection Prevention and Control under Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines revealed the following: Number 17. Water Management, (b): Control measures and testing protocols are in place to address potential hazards associated with the facility's water system. Review of the undated facility's policy titled, Water Management Program under Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines revealed the following: Number 8. The water management team shall regularly verify that the water management program is being implemented as designed. Auditing assignments will reflect that individuals will not verify the program…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-07-18 · tag F0640 — pattern
    Encode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff interviews, and review of the facility's policy titled iQIES or Other System Downtime MDS, the facility failed to ensure that required Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments were transmitted within regulatory guidelines to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Quality Improvement Evaluation System (QIES) Assessment Submission and Processing (ASAP) System for 31 residents (R) (R89,R55, R56, R8, R62, R7, R33, R85, R3, R19, R86, R84, R16, R31, R91, R15, R25, R72, R75, R88, R81, R90, R77, R38, R45, R20, R92, R78, R50, R278, and R368) out of 44 sampled residents. Findings Include: Review of the undated facility's policy titled iQIES or Other System Downtime MDS, under the Policy section revealed, It is the policy of this facility to transmit MDS data timely so that the facility will not be negatively impacted by iQIES or other system downtimes. Under the Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines section revealed, 1. All required MDS assessment files will be transmitted to…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-07-18 · tag F0655 — isolated
    Create and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record reviews, staff interviews, and review of the facility's policy titled, Baseline Care Plan, the facility failed to develop a baseline care plan within 48 hours of admission that addressed two medications, (an opioid and a diuretic) for one out of five sampled residents (R ) (R33) selected for unnecessary medications review. This had the potential to cause adverse medical effects for R33 with no known interventions for staff. Findings include: Review of the undated facility's policy titled; Baseline Care Plan under Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines revealed, 1. The baseline care plan will: (a.) Be developed within 48 hours of a resident's admission. (b.) Include the minimum healthcare information necessary to properly care for a resident including, but not limited to: i. Initial goals based on admission orders; ii. Physician orders; iii. Dietary orders; iv. Therapy services; v. Social services; vi. PASARR recommendation, if applicable 2.(b.) Interventions shall be initiated that address the resident's current needs including: i. Any health and safety…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-07-18 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff and resident interviews, and review of the facility's policy titled, Comprehensive Care Plans, the facility failed to develop a care plan that included a communication or language preference for one of three sampled residents (R) (R179) whose primary language was not English. This deficiency had the potential to adversely impact the quality of care and quality of life provided to the resident. Findings include: Review of the undated facility's policy titled, Comprehensive Care Plans, under Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines revealed the following, Number 3. The comprehensive care plan will describe, at a minimum, the following: (f.) Resident specific interventions that reflect the resident's needs and preferences and align with the resident's cultural identity, as indicated. If the resident is non-English-speaking, the facility will identify how communication will occur with the resident. The care plan will identify the language spoken and tools used to communicate. Number…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-12-06 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
    Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on resident family interview, Staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility policy titled, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation, the facility failed to protect the resident's (R) R1 right to be free from sexual abuse by (R5). Specifically, the facility failed to ensure a safe environment for (R1) from (R5) with known behaviors of exposing his penis, masturbating, and inappropriately touching female residents. Findings include: Review of the policy titled Abuse Neglect and Exploitation dated 8/1/2023 indicated under 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. VI. Protection of Resident: The facility will make efforts to ensure all residents are protected from physical and psychosocial harm, as well as additional abuse, during and after the investigation. Examples…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-12-06 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
    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 policy titled, Compliance with Reporting Allegations of Abuse/Neglect/Exploitation, the facility failed to implement policies and procedures for ensuring the reporting of a reasonable suspicion of a crime in accordance with section 1150B of the Act of an allegation of sexual abuse was reported to the State Survey Agency (SSA) within the required time frame for two of eleven residents (R) (R5 and R8). Specifically, the facility failed to report R5 exhibited sexually aggressive behavior, saying sexual things, and exposing his penis to R8. Findings include: Review of the policy titled Compliance with Reporting Allegations of Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation dated 8/1/2023 indicated under Policy: It is the policy of this facility to report all allegations of abuse/neglect/exploitation or mistreatment, are reported immediately to appropriate agencies in accordance with current state and federal regulations within prescribed timeframes. Compliance…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2022-05-25 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — widespread
    Set up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interviews, review of facility documentation, and policy review titled Quality Assurance Performance Improvement, the facility failed to ensure policies and procedures were implemented to address the facility's Quality Assessment and Performance Improvement (QAPI) plan and program, in which data was gathered, analyzed, developed, implemented, and re-evaluated to address adverse events related to potential deficient practice. This had the potential to affect all 44 residents residing in the facility at the time of the survey. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Quality Assurance Performance Improvement, dated 7/10/20, indicated . It is the policy of this facility to develop, implement, and maintain an effective, comprehensive, data driven QAPI program that focuses on indicators of the outcomes of care and quality of life . The QAPI program will be ongoing, comprehensive, and will address the full range of care and services provided by the facility . At a minimum, the QAPI will . Address all systems of care and management practices . Include clinical care,…

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

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2022-05-25 · tag F0868 — widespread
    Have the Quality Assessment and Assurance group have the required members and meet at least quarterly
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review, interviews, and review of facility policy titled Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI), the facility failed to ensure that the Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) committee met at least quarterly. The census was 44. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Quality Assurance & Performance Improvement (QAPI), dated 7/20/20, indicated . Meet at least quarterly and as needed to coordinate and evaluate activities under the QAPI program, such as identifying issues with respect to which quality assessment and assurance activities, including performance improvement projects under the QAPI program, are necessary. Review of documents titled QAPI Sign In Sheet, for the year 2021, indicated the facility held QAPI meetings on a monthly basis. The last QAPI meeting was held on 12/30/21. There was no additional information provided to show the facility held a quarterly QAPI meeting for the month of March 2022. During an interview on 5/25/22 at 4:16 p.m., the Administrator confirmed the March 2022 quarterly QAPI meeting was not held. 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.

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2022-05-25 · tag F0885 — failed to notify residents/families about COVID-19 — widespread
    Report COVID19 data to residents and families.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review, interview, and review of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) policy, the facility failed to ensure that all residents and/or their representatives were informed by 5:00 p.m. the next calendar day following the occurrence of a single resident or staff confirmed COVID-19 positive infection, received cumulative updates, and informed of mitigating actions taken by the facility to prevent or reduce the risk of transmission. The census was 44. Findings include: Review of CMS QSO-20-29-NH, dated 5/6/20, indicated, Facilities must .Inform residents, their representatives, and families of those residing in facilities by 5:00 p.m. the next calendar day following the occurrence of either a single confirmed infection of COVID-19, or three or more residents or staff with new-onset of respiratory symptoms occurring within 72 hours of each other.Include information on mitigating actions implemented to prevent or reduce the risk of transmission, including if normal operations of the facility will be altered; and . Include any cumulative updates . During 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2022-05-25 · tag F0655 — pattern
    Create and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, interviews, and review of the facility policy titled, Baseline Care Plan, the facility failed to develop a baseline care plan for five of five residents (R) (R#242, R#1, R#40, R#193, and R#141), out of 20 sample residents Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Baseline Care Plan dated 1/1/21 revealed The facility will develop and implement a baseline care plan for each resident that includes the instructions needed to provide effective and person-centered care of the resident that meet professional standards of quality care .1. The baseline care plan will: a. Be developed within 48 hours of a resident's admission. b. Include the minimum healthcare information necessary to properly care for a resident . A written summary of the baseline care plan shall be provided to the resident and representative in a language that the resident/representative can understand. The summary shall include, at a minimum, the following: a. The initial goals of the resident. b. A summary 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2022-05-25 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — pattern
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, observation, interviews, review of the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI), and review of the facility policy titled, Comprehensive Care Plan the facility failed to develop and implement a person-centered comprehensive plan of care with measurable goals and timeframe's to meet resident needs for five of 20 residents (R) (R#29, R#12, R#40, R#1, and R#141) reviewed for care planning. Findings include: Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Manual, dated 10/19, indicated, . Care Area Assessment (CAA) Process. This process is designed to assist the assessor to systematically interpret the information recorded on the MDS . The CAA process helps the clinician to focus on key issues identified during the assessment process so that decisions as to whether and how to intervene can be explored with the resident . Specific components of the CAA process include: - Care Area Triggers (CATs) are specific resident responses for one or a combination of MDS…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2022-05-25 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY 2. Review of the admission Record, revealed R#1 was admitted on [DATE]. Review of R#1's physician orders (PO) dated 5/12/22, revealed Droplet Precautions x 10 days every shift for 10 Days and review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed the droplet precautions were schedule for completion on the end of the day shift, 3:00 p.m., on 5/22/22. Observation on 5/22/22 at 10:59 a.m. revealed outside R#1's room there were signs for Contact & Droplet Precaution and CDC signs for how to properly don and doff PPE. Continued observation on 5/22/22 revealed R#1 was taken to the therapy room without a mask by Physical Therapist (PT) VV who was only wearing a surgical mask and no gown or gloves. Continued observation revealed PT VV worked with R#1 for a half-hour and transported R#1 back to his room, without a gown or gloves. Interview on 5/22/22 at 11:34 a.m. with PT VV stated that R#1 has been on quarantine for more than 10 days, so he knew that he did not need to wear PPE. During an additional observation…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2022-05-25 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — pattern
    Develop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
    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, interview, policy review, and review of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines, the facility failed to offer three of five residents (R) (R#11, R#26, and R#241) reviewed for influenza/pneumonia vaccinations. Specifically, the facility failed to offer R#11, R#26, and R#241 and/or their representative the opportunity to be vaccinated with Pneumococcal 15-valent Conjugate Vaccine (PCV15) or Prevnar 20 (PCV20) in accordance with nationally recognized standards. In addition, the facility's pneumococcal vaccination data was not updated to reflect current CDC guidelines dated 1/27/22. Findings include: Review of the CDC guidance titled Use of 15-Valent Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine Among U.S. Adults: Updated Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices - United States, 2022 dated 1/27/22 revealed Adults aged 65 years who have not previously received a pneumococcal conjugate vaccine or whose previous vaccination history is unknown should receive 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2022-05-25 · tag F0888 — pattern
    Ensure staff are vaccinated for COVID-19
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure that the staff COVID-19 vaccination rate was 100%, and that the facility's COVID-19 Vaccination Policy for staff was in accordance with Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) guidelines. The census was 44. Findings include: Review of CMS QSO- 22-07-All-Revised revised on 4/5/22 revealed, . the regulations and guidance described in this attachment apply to all states. Implementation of this guidance will occur according to the timeframe's and parameters identified in either QSO-22-07-ALL-Revised effective 12/28/21, QSO-22-09-ALL- Revised effective 1/14/22, or QSO-22-11-ALL-Revised effective 1/20/22, . Long Term Care and Skilled Nursing Facility Attachment A . The facility must develop and implement policies and procedures to ensure that all staff are fully vaccinated for COVID-19. For purposes of this section, staff are considered fully vaccinated if it has been 2 weeks or more since they completed a primary vaccination series for COVID-19. The completion of a primary vaccination series for…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-05-25 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
    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 and interviews, the facility failed to ensure written information on advance directives was provided to two of four residents (R), (R#12 and R#1), reviewed for advance directives. Findings include: Review of a document included in the facility's admission packet titled Acknowledgement and Consents, revealed Resuscitation.The policy of this Healthcare Facility is to initiate Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) as a resuscitation procedure to restore breathing and/or heartbeat if I am found to be in Cardiopulmonary arrest, except when my attending physician has documented a valid Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) order on my permanent record. Review of this document revealed no information on what constitutes an advance directive and/or any instructions on how to develop an advance directive. 1. Review of clinical record revealed R#12 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of end stage renal disease. Review of R#12's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-05-25 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolated
    Ensure that each resident is free from the use of physical restraints, unless needed for medical treatment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, interviews, and review of the facility policy titled Restraint Free Environment the facility failed to assess one resident (R) (R#141) for the safe use of a medical hand mitten (used to hinder disrupting medical treatment such as pulling out tubes) and/or an arm/hand restraint prior to implementation, failed to ensure there were physician orders to apply and remove restraint. In addition, the facility failed to obtain consent for the use of the restraint and failed to re-evaluate the continued use of the restraint. Findings include: Review of a facility policy titled Restraint Free Environment, dated 5/22/22, indicated It is the policy of this facility that physical restraints may be used in emergency care situations for brief periods to permit medically necessary treatment that has been ordered by a practitioner unless the resident has previously made a valid refusal of the treatment in question. A physician's order alone is not sufficient to warrant the use of a physical restraint. 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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-05-25 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolated
    Develop 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

    Based on interview, record review, and review of the facility policy titled Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation, the facility failed to implement the facility abuse policy by failing to ensure the references for the Administrator were checked prior to employment. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation, dated 9/28/21, indicated . The components of the facility's abuse prohibition plan are discussed herein. Potential employees will be screened for a history of abuse, neglect, exploitation, or misappropriation of resident property.Background, reference, and credentials' checks shall be conducted on potential employees, contracted temporary staff, students affiliated with academic institutions, volunteers, and consultants . Review of the employee file for the Administrator indicated the date of hire was 6/29/20. The Administrator's employee file did not include evidence that a reference check for employment was completed prior to employment. During an interview on 5/24/22 at 2:48 p.m., Human Resources confirmed there were no employment…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-05-25 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
    Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, interviews, and review of the facility policy titled, Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation, the facility failed to ensure a thorough investigation was completed for an injury of unknown origin for one of three residents (R) R#1, reviewed for accidents. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation, revised on 9/28/21, directs Possible indicators of abuse include . Physical injury of a resident, of unknown source . An immediate investigation is warranted when suspicion of abuse, neglect or exploitation, or reports of abuse, neglect or exploitation occur . written procedures for the investigation include . identifying and interviewing all involved persons, including the alleged victim, alleged perpetrator, witnesses, and others who might have knowledge of the allegations. Review of the clinical record revealed R#1 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses of fractures and other multiple traumas, coronary artery disease, dementia, and depression. Review of…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-05-25 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, observation, interviews, and review of the facility policy titled, Fall Prevention Program, the facility failed to ensure one resident (R) (R#29) of three residents reviewed for accident hazards, identified potential risk factors to prevent further falls. Findings include: Review of facility policy titled Fall Prevention Program, dated 5/22/22, indicated . Each resident will be assessed for fall risk and will receive care and services in accordance with their individualized level of risk to minimize the likelihood of falls . The facility utilizes a standardized risk assessment for determining a resident's fall risk . The risk assessment categorizes residents according to low, moderate, or high risk . For program identification purposes, the facility utilizes high risk and low/moderate risk, using the scoring method designated on the risk assessment . Upon admission, the nurse will complete a fall risk assessment along with the admission assessment to determine the resident's level of fall…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-05-25 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolated
    Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
    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 policies, the facility failed to assess nutritional status after a significant weight loss and failed to notify the physician of the weight loss for one resident (R) (R#29), of three residents reviewed for nutrition. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Nutritional Management, dated 11/19/21, indicated . The facility provides care and services to each resident to ensure the resident maintains acceptable parameters of nutritional status in the context of his or her overall condition . A systematic approach is used to optimize each resident's nutritional status . Identifying and assessing each resident's nutritional status and risk factors . Evaluating/analyzing the assessment information . Developing and consistently implementing pertinent approaches . Monitoring the effectiveness of interventions and revising them as necessary . Review of the facility policy titled Weight Monitoring, dated 11/19/21, indicated . Based on 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-05-25 · tag F0838 — failed to assess facility resources and resident needs — isolated
    Conduct and document a facility-wide assessment to determine what resources are necessary to care for residents competently during both day-to-day operations (including nights and weekends) and emergencies.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review, staff interview, and review of the Facility Assessment, the facility failed to conduct and document a comprehensive facility-wide assessment to evaluate the characteristics of the resident population, community resources, and risks and failed to develop a plan to address these factors and deploy their resources in the most effective manner to maintain safety and security for all facility residents. The census was 44. Findings include: Review of the Facility Assessment revealed the purpose is to determine what resources are necessary to care for the residents competently during day-to-day operations and emergencies. Review of the Facility Assessment revealed it was not completed in its entirety and was not signed by the Administrator or approved by the Quality Assurance (QA) Committee. Further review revealed the Facility Assessment failed to address the following pertinent characteristics affecting day-to-day operations: 1. The specialized training and competencies of the staff who work in the facility, such as a certified wound care professional, infection…

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

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“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.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • 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.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

$4,017 in federal fines across 1 penalty. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.

  • $4,017 — penalty dated 2024-07-18
  • Medicare payment denial — starting 2024-10-16 for 2 days

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.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
KIM, EUGENEIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 03/28/2022
KIM, HANSONIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICERNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 08/20/2020
COTTON, DANNYIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 08/20/2020
RADMAN, BRUCEIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 08/22/2020
SEOL, SUKHEEIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 08/22/2020

CMS files one row per role, so the 9 rows in the source record cover these 5 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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.

$8.1M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+4.8%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$275K
Related-party expense4% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 25%Medicare 46%Other / private 29%

This home reported $275K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. 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

$437per resident / day
operating cost
$13,287per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$459per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). 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

Paying with Medicaid

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.

Typical monthly cost in Georgia
$8,821/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$9,429/mo
Nursing home (private)
$5,300/mo
Assisted living

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 115772. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-11-21, 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.

What to do next