Pruitthealth - Old Capitol
310 Highway #1 Bypass, Louisville, GA 30434 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 143 certified beds · (478) 625-3741 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (32% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- 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 (F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0565)
- inspectors cited 3 immediate-jeopardy problems — the most serious level
- the CMS record shows $28,179 in federal fines (most recent 2024-05-23)
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
- about 23% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 of 5 |
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 | 9.5% | 15.3% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 3.3% | 5.6% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.4% | 0.9% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 3.9% | 2.5% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 1.3% | 11.3% | 6.5% | better |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 3.0% | 3.2% | 3.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 4.4% | 15.2% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 24.9% | 20.5% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 95.6% | 95.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 5.5% | 5.6% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 7.8% | 15.8% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 22.5% | 19.9% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.2% | 2.6% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 84.3% | 78.4% | 79.4% | 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.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.07 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 3% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 3% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — Newly certified nursing home with less than 12-15 months of data available or the nursing home opened less than 6 months ago, and there were no data to submit or claims for this measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 143 beds and averages 100.9 residents a day — about 71% occupied, or roughly 42 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 3.12 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.25 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.04 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.88 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.21 on weekdays — 10% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.29 to 0.15 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 32% is below 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.
13 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2024-05-23 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — isolatedEnsure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, record review, and a review of the facility policy titled Facility Assessment Tool, the facility failed to provide education for all nursing staff to possess the competencies and skill sets necessary to ensure residents were free of medication errors as well as ensure these competencies and skill sets were monitored on an ongoing basis. As a result, one of 26 residents (Resident (R) 50) out of a total sample of 83 residents was hospitalized after a nurse administered a benzodiazepine (an antianxiety drug that can cause sedation), which was not ordered by the physician, to the resident. The facility's failure to provide education for all nursing staff to possess the competencies and skill sets necessary to ensure residents were free of medication errors as well as ensure these competencies and skill sets were monitored on an ongoing basis presented a likelihood of serious harm, injury, impairment, or death due to the significant medication error for R50. Immediate Jeopardy was identified on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2024-05-23 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
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 and staff interviews, record review, and a review of the facility policy titled Medication Administration: Oral Medications, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from significant medication errors for one of 26 sampled residents (Resident (R) 50) out of 83 total residents. R50 received a benzodiazepine (an antianxiety drug that can cause sedation), that was not ordered by the physician and contributed to her hospitalization. The facility's failure to ensure residents were free from significant medication errors presented a likelihood of serious harm, injury, impairment, or death to a resident. Immediate Jeopardy was identified on 5/22/2024 in the area of §483.45 Pharmacy Services F760 at a scope and severity (S/S) of J. The Administrator and Director of Health Services (DHS) were informed on 5/22/2024 at 2:50 pm that the Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) existed related to the failure to ensure residents were free from significant medication errors for one resident. The Immediate Jeopardy…
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.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2024-05-23 · tag F0835 — failed to run the facility competently — isolatedAdminister the facility in a manner that enables it to use its resources effectively and efficiently.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interviews, facility policy reviews, and job description reviews, the facility was not administered in a manner that enabled it to use its resources effectively and efficiently to avoid significant medication errors during nursing medication administration. The facility failed to provide continued, effective oversight of the nursing staff's medication administration practices. This failure affected one of 26 residents out of 83 total residents (Resident (R) 50) when R50 received a benzodiazepine (an antianxiety drug that can cause sedation), which was not ordered by the physician and contributed to R50 hospitalization. The failure of the facility to provide continued, effective oversight of nursing staff's medication administration practices presented a likelihood of serious harm, injury, impairment, or death due to the significant medication error for R50. Immediate Jeopardy was identified on 5/22/2024 in the area of §483.70 Administration F835 at a scope and severity (S/S) of J. The Administrator and Director of Health Services (DHS) were informed on 5/23/2024 at 9:13 am…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-11-18 · 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, staff interviews, and review of the facility's policies titled Labeling, Dating, and Storage, the facility failed to ensure that food was properly labeled and stored. This deficient practice had the potential to place the 88 residents receiving nutrition and hydration from the kitchen at increased risk of foodborne illness.Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Labeling, Dating, and Storage, dated 11/11/2022, revealed the Policy Statement stated, It is the policy of [Company Name] for all partners who assist in handling, preparing, serving, and storing food and beverage items to follow the proper procedures for labeling, dating, and storage to ensure proper food safety. The Procedure section stated 1. Food and beverage items will have an identifying label as well as a received date and opened date, as applicable: for items prepared onsite, a 'use by' date will also be indicated. 2. Foods will be stored in their original or approved container and, if opened, shall be wrapped tightly with film, foil, etc. 3. Bulk food dispensing utensils (scoops)…
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 · D2025-11-18 · tag F0554 — isolatedAllow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, resident and staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility policy titled Self-Administration of Medication by Patients/Residents, the facility failed to ensure one of 34 sampled residents (R) (R43) was assessed for medication self-administration before allowing medications at the bedside. This deficient practice had the potential to place R43 at increased risk of medical complications related to medication use. Findings include:A review of the facility policy titled Self-Administration of Medication by Patients/Residents, reviewed 1/6/22025, revealed the Procedure section included, . 3. If the Licensed nurse determines the patient/resident or family member to be capable of self-administration of medications, the attending physician must write an order to that effect that includes the specific medications based off of the Self-Administration Medication Observation. Review of the clinical record for R43 revealed diagnoses including, but not limited to, vascular dementia, hemiplegia, and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting the left…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-11-18 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility policy titled Infection Prevention-Hand Hygiene, the facility failed to ensure infection control practices were followed during wound care for one of four residents (R) (R8) with wounds. This deficient practice had the potential to place R8 at increased risk for infection due to cross-contamination. Findings include:Review of the facility policy titled Infection Prevention-Hand Hygiene, revised October 2024, revealed the Procedures section included, D. Indications Requiring Hand Wash or Hand Rub: 1. Before and after contact with the resident. 2. Before donning gloves, including sterile gloves. 7. Immediately after removal of personal protective equipment (e.g., gloves, gown, facemasks).Observation on 9/20/2025 at 1:05 pm revealed Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) AA provided wound care for R8. Observation during the wound care revealed that the LPN changed gloves between each step of the wound care, and did not perform hand hygiene between glove changes during the wound care or between dirty and clean…
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 · F2024-05-23 · tag F0565 — failed to support the resident council — widespreadHonor the resident's right to organize and participate in resident/family groups in the facility.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on resident and staff interviews, review of Resident Council Minutes, and review of the facility policy titled, Patient/Resident Council, the facility failed to ensure a response was provided to the members of the resident council when concerns were identified related to transportation accommodations for outings. During the resident council meeting four residents (R) (R30, R36, R54, and R78) had complaints of transportation not being provided for outings and had not received a response. Findings include: Review of documentation provided by the facility titled Patient/Resident Council Minutes/Report Form, from 8/29/2022 to 4/22/2024, included Old Business/Resolutions [store name] trip is on hold due to [transportation company name] does not have van available at this time. Vans is in shop & [sic] also have wrecked vans. Ongoing trip to [store name] pending a van for transportation. During a Resident Council Meeting held on 5/21/2024 at 10:30 am, R30, the Resident Council President stated that residents wanted to take trips, they want a van for transportation, and the Activities…
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 · F2024-05-23 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — widespreadEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interviews, and review of the facility policy titled Controlled Substances for Healthcare Centers, the facility failed to ensure that controlled medications (drugs that can cause physical and mental dependence and have restrictions on how they can be filled and refilled) were stored separately from other medications and were stored under a double-lock system in two of two medication storage room refrigerators. Findings include: Observation on 5/21/2024 at 9:18 am of the East Wing medication room, which was located behind the nurses' station, with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 1 revealed the locked refrigerator in the medication storage room contained the following medications: 1. One Novolog insulin aspart flexpen for Resident (R)13. 2. One Levemir insulin flexpen for R22. 3. One Levemir insulin flexpen for R37. 4. One Novolog insulin flexpen and two Lantus Solostar insulin pen for R41. 5. Three Novolog insulin aspart flexpens for R31. 6. Four Novolog insulin aspart flexpens and one injection of Aranesp (a drug used to treat anemia) for R61. 7. Two…
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 before2024-05-23 · 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, staff interviews, and review of the facility policy titled Labeling, Dating, and Storage, the facility failed to ensure food items were securely closed, labeled, and dated after opening. This had the potential to affect 75 of 83 residents who consumed food from the kitchen. Findings include: 1. During observation and initial kitchen walk-through with the Dietary Manager (DM) on 5/20/2024 beginning at 9:35 am, the following was observed and confirmed by the DM: a. In the dry storage room, there was a one-pound bag of macaroni spiral pasta, open to air, undated and unlabeled. b. In the dry storage room, there was an opened bag of cookies (removed from the original container) that was undated and unlabeled. c. In the walk-in cooler, there were 15 cups of juice in cups that were undated and unlabeled. 2. During a second kitchen walkthrough on 5/21/2024 at 8:48 am with the DM, the following was observed and confirmed by the DM: a. In the walk-in cooler, there was a one-gallon container of ranch dressing that was open, undated, and unlabeled. b. In the walk-in…
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 · F2024-05-23 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — widespreadSet 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 interview, review of facility documentation, and review of facility policy, the Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) committee failed to ensure it developed and maintained a program to provide systematic analysis and systemic action aimed at performance improvement. This failure had the potential to affect all 83 residents who currently live in the facility. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, [Company Name] Skilled Nursing and Rehabilitation Center Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI), dated 02/26/2016, revealed, Policy Statement: The purpose of Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) Program at [Company Name] is to continually take a proactive approach to assure and improve the way we provide care and engage with our patients, partners and other stakeholders so that we may fully realize our vision, mission and commitment to caring pledge. Scope: This policy applies to [Company Name] Skilled Nursing and Rehabilitation Centers (SNRC) and partners as part of the overall QAPI Plan .Procedure: All [Company Name]…
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 · F2024-05-23 · tag F0868 — widespreadHave 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 interview, review of facility documentation, and review of facility policy, the Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) committee failed to ensure the required members of the committee attended the quarterly meetings. This failure had the potential to affect all 83 residents who currently live in the facility. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Skilled Nursing and Rehabilitation Center Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI), dated 02/26/2016, revealed, Policy Statement: The purpose of Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) Program at [Company Name] is to continually take a proactive approach to assure and improve the way we provide care and engage with our patients, partners and other stakeholders so that we may fully realize our vision, mission and commitment to caring pledge. Scope: This policy applies to [Company Name] Skilled Nursing and Rehabilitation Centers (SNRC) and partners as part of the overall [Company Name] QAPI Plan .Procedure: All [Company Name] partners and contracted staff are responsible 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.
- Potential for harm · D2022-09-01 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond 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 policy titled, Freedom from Patient Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation, Mistreatment, and Misappropriation of Property Mission Statement, the facility failed to ensure a thorough investigation was completed for an injury of unknown origin for one of 26 sampled residents (R) (R#14). Findings include: A review of the policy titled, Freedom from Patient Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation, Mistreatment, and Misappropriation of Property Mission Statement with a review date of 1/8/19 indicated that it is the mission of Pruitthealth and its affiliated providers actively to preserve each patient's right to be free from abuse, neglect, exploitation, mistreatment, and misappropriation of patient property. The organization recognizes that every patient has the right be free from verbal, sexual, physical, and mental abuse, corporal punishment, and involuntary seclusion. A review of the clinical record for R#14 revealed resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-09-01 · tag 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 observation, record review, and review of the facility policy titled Stop Orders-Healthcare Centers revealed the facility failed to ensure that a psychotropic medications/antianxiety medication was not ordered as needed (PRN) for more than 14 days unless clinically indicated for one of five residents (R) (R#64) reviewed for unnecessary medications. Fundings include: A review of the facility policy titled Stop Orders-Healthcare Centers reviewed 6/22/22 revealed: Policy Statement: It is the policy of the healthcare center to automatically stop medications after the indicated number of days, unless the prescriber specifies a different number of doses or duration of therapy given. Procedure: 1.The following classes of medications are stopped automatically after the indicated number of days, unless the prescriber specifies a different number of doses or duration of therapy to be given. PRN antipsychotic medications-14 days 3.When entering medications covered by the Stop Order Policy on the Medication…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“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
$28,179 in federal fines across 4 penalties.
- $5,346 — penalty dated 2024-05-23
- $6,500 — penalty dated 2024-05-23
- $6,682 — penalty dated 2024-05-23
- $9,651 — penalty dated 2024-05-23
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to PRUITTHEALTH — 95 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 | 1 of 5 | 2.9 | -1.9 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 1 of 5 | 2.8 | -1.8 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 2.5 | -0.5 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 3.6 | +0.4 vs chain |
The other 94 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.9★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 94; lowest-rated first.
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| BROWN, TRACY | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | since 05/31/2021 |
| PRUITT, NEIL | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 09/25/2007 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 4 rows in the source record cover these 2 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 85% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $2.1M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 23% 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. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
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 115681. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-11-18, 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.