Sandtown Health and Rehabilitation
1480 Sandtown Road SW, Marietta, GA 30008 · For profit - Corporation · 109 certified beds · (770) 422-1755 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (23% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Nov 2022
- inspectors cited 5 immediate-jeopardy problems — the most serious level
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 5 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 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 11.2% | 15.3% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 3.2% | 5.6% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.6% | 0.9% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.7% | 2.5% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 27.2% | 11.3% | 6.5% | check this† — see note marked dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 3.5% | 3.2% | 3.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 18.1% | 15.2% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 21.9% | 20.5% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 87.0% | 95.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.5% | 5.6% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 24.1% | 15.8% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 40.5% | 19.9% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 6.9% | 2.6% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 16.7% | 78.4% | 79.4% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.53 | 2.15 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.84 | 1.90 | 1.80 | typical |
† This value is several times the typical-state benchmark. It can be real, or it can be a coding artifact in what the facility submitted. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
61.0% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 39 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 4.8% 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 21 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.21 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 25% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 44% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 61.0%CMS range 46.0–77.0 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 17.5%CMS range 13.1–23.5 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | worse 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 discharge | 4.8% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 4.8% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 19.1% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 15.9% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 95.7% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 4.5% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 6.8% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 8.1%CMS range 4.9–13.2 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.32 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 109 beds and averages 83.6 residents a day — about 77% occupied, or roughly 25 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 3.34 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.21 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.11 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.01 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.47 on weekdays — 13% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.24 to 0.13 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 23% is below the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are 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.
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.
12 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Immediate jeopardy · K2022-11-14 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — patternProtect 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 observations, record reviews, resident and staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to maintain an environment free from verbal and physical abuse for eight residents (R#156, R#16, R#11, R#23, R#25, R#39, R#101 and R#27) of 47 sampled residents. Specifically: 1. R#68 engaged in ongoing verbal and physical abuse of residents including R#156, R#16, R#11, R#23, R#25, R#39, and R#101. 2. R#27 was physically held down by a staff member while being dressed. On 11/10/22 a determination was made that a situation in which the facility's noncompliance with one or more requirements of participation caused or had the likelihood to cause serious injury, harm, impairment, or death to residents. The facility's Administrator and the Regional Consultant were informed of the Immediate Jeopardy for F600 on 11/11/22 at 4:30 p.m. The noncompliance related to the Immediate Jeopardy was identified to have existed on 11/7/22. An Acceptable Removal Plan was received on 11/13/22. The survey team interviewed…
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 · K2022-11-14 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — patternDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, electronic and paper medical record reviews, facility policy reviews, and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure care plan interventions for emergency tracheostomy (trach) care were developed for four residents (R) (R#6, R#91, R#96, and R#256) reviewed for tracheostomy care. Additionally, the facility failed to ensure a care plan was developed to include special treatments (hemodialysis) for one resident (R#85) reviewed for dialysis. The sample size was 47 residents. On 11/10/22 a determination was made that a situation in which the facility's noncompliance with one or more requirements of participation caused or had the likelihood to cause serious injury, harm, impairment, or death to residents. The facility's Administrator, the Regional Consultant, and the Director of Nursing were informed of the Immediate Jeopardy for F656 on 11/10/22 at 11:10 a.m. The noncompliance related to the Immediate Jeopardy was identified to have existed on 11/7/22. An Acceptable Removal Plan was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Immediate jeopardy · K2022-11-14 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — patternProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record reviews, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure staff were trained for emergency care of tracheostomies (trachs) and provide emergency tracheostomy kits for four of four residents (R) (R#96, R#91, R#6, and R#256) reviewed for tracheostomy care. The facility's failure to train staff and provide emergency tracheostomy kits in the event that the resident's airway was compromised, placed all residents with tracheostomies at increased likelihood of serious harm or death. On 11/10/22 a determination was made that a situation in which the facility's noncompliance with one or more requirements of participation caused or had the likelihood to cause serious injury, harm, impairment, or death to residents. The facility's Administrator, the Regional Consultant, and the Director of Nursing were informed of the Immediate Jeopardy for F695 on 11/10/22 at 11:10 a.m. The noncompliance related to the Immediate Jeopardy was identified to have existed on 11/7/22. An…
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 · K2022-11-14 · tag F0835 — failed to run the facility competently — patternAdminister 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 observation, record review, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure the facility was administered in a manner that enabled it to use its resources effectively and efficiently to maintain the highest practicable level of well-being four of four residents (R) (R#96, R#91, R#6, and R#256) reviewed for tracheostomy care and for seven residents reviewed for abuse (R#156, R#16, R#11, R#23, R#25, R#39, R#101 and R#27). Specifically: 1. The facility administration failed to ensure competent clinical staff and provide supplies to care for residents with tracheostomies to include emergency care for accidental trach dislodgement for four of four residents (R) (R#96, R#91, R#6, and R#256). Cross Refer to F695. 2. The facility administration failed to ensure the environment was maintained free from abuse from R#68. Cross refer to F600. On 11/10/22 a determination was made that a situation in which the facility's noncompliance with one or more requirements of participation caused or had the likelihood to cause serious injury, harm, impairment, or death 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.
- Immediate jeopardy · K2022-11-14 · tag F0940 — failed to train staff — patternDevelop, implement, and/or maintain an effective training program for all new and existing staff members.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record reviews, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure competent clinical staff were trained to care for residents with tracheostomies and for emergency care for accidental trach dislodgement for four of four residents (R) (R#96, R#91, R#6, and R#256) reviewed for tracheostomy care. The facility's failure to properly train staff for complex care of tracheostomies and emergency airway maintenance placed all residents with tracheostomies at increased likelihood of serious harm or death. On 11/10/22 a determination was made that a situation in which the facility's noncompliance with one or more requirements of participation caused or had the likelihood to cause serious injury, harm, impairment, or death to residents. The facility's Administrator, the Regional Consultant, and the Director of Nursing were informed of the Immediate Jeopardy for F695 on 11/10/22 at 11:10 a.m. The noncompliance related to the Immediate Jeopardy was identified to have existed on 11/7/22.…
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 · F2026-03-12 · 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 observation, staff interview, and review of the facility's policies titled Date and Label, and Employee Hygiene, the facility failed to ensure expired food items were discarded by the expiration date, and opened items were labeled and dated after opening. In addition, the facility failed to ensure dietary staff were wearing beard guards while working in the kitchen area. The deficient practice increased the risk for 81 residents who were on an oral diet from a census of 83 residents to consume expired food items. Findings Include:Review of facility's policy titled Date and Label, dated 03/2025, documented in the Policy Statement: It is the policy of the facility to handle food in a safe and sanitary manner. The government has mandated with the following statement: labeling, dating, and monitoring refrigerated food, including, but not limited to leftovers, so it is used by its use-by date, or frozen (when applicable) or discarded.' All food, whether frozen, fresh, or cooked, has specific guidelines for discarding. Nonperishable foods may adhere to the expiration or used by…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-12 · tag 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 observation, staff interviews, and review of the facility policy titled Enhanced Barrier Precautions, the facility failed to follow Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) for one resident (R) (R5) from a sample of 19 residents. The deficient practice increased the risk of cross contamination and the spread of infection between staff and residents. Findings include:Review of the Facility's Policy Enhanced Barrier Precautions dated 12/01/2022 documented Enhanced Barrier Precautions. refer to the use of gown and gloves for use during high-contact resident care activities (e.g., residents with wounds or indwelling medical devices). Section 1c documented clear signage will be posted on the door or wall outside the resident room indicating the type of precautions, required personal protective equipment (PPE), and the high-contact resident care activities that require the use of gown and gloves.Observed wound care for R5 on 03/11/2026 at 11:00 AM with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) BB and Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) DD. R5 was positioned on his left side for wound care by CNA…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-06 · tag F0791 — failed to provide routine dental services — isolatedProvide or obtain dental services for each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, resident and staff interviews, and record review, the facility failed to provide dental services for one of 38 sampled residents (R) (R25). This failure had the potential to negatively impact R25's quality of life. Findings include: Review of the electronic medical record (EMR) revealed that R25 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses including but not limited to cerebral infarction, acute and chronic respiratory failure, tobacco use, muscle weakness, vascular dementia with agitation, major depressive disorder, type 2 diabetes mellitus without complications, hypertensive heart disease, history of falls, hemiplegia, left hand contracture. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments dated 12/19/2024 for R25 revealed in Section C (Cognitive Patterns) a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 11, indicating moderate cognitive deficit. Section L (Oral/Dental Status) revealed no complaints of problems with eating, chewing or pain related to his oral status. Section G (Functional Status revealed R25 is dependent with all activities 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.
- Potential for harm · D2022-11-14 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, record review, policy review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure that three residents of 47 sampled residents (R) (R#18, R#34, and R#19) had a clean, comfortable, and homelike environment. Findings include: Review of the Routine Cleaning and Disinfection policy, implemented 11/5/22 and provided by the facility, revealed Cleaning refers to the removal of visible soil .Routine cleaning and disinfection of frequently touched or visibly soiled surfaces will be performed in resident rooms. Review of the Environmental Services Cleaning Procedures for Common Items policy, dated 2022 and provided by the facility, revealed Floors .Clean on a regular basis when soiled. During an observation on 11/7/22 at 10:27 a.m., R#18's room observations revealed multiple brown crumbs and a one-inch by two-inch piece of brown cake like substance, along the baseboard on left side of bed, which was up against the wall. During an observation on 11/7/22 at 12:42 p.m., R#34's room observations revealed the floor had a sticky feel while walking on it and back/brown crumbs…
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 · D2022-11-14 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, observations, and record review, the facility (1) failed to ensure that staff conducted weekly skin assessments to monitor a rash for one of 47 sampled residents (R) (R#34); (2) failed to followed physician's orders for wound care for one of 47 sampled residents (R#39); and (3) failed to obtain a physician's order for fingerstick glucose levels for two of 47 sampled residents (R#29 and R#3). Findings include: Review of facility-provided policy titled Wound Care, undated, revealed The purpose of this procedure is to provide guidelines for the care of wounds to promote healing . Verify that there is a physician's order for this procedure . Assemble the equipment and supplies as needed . Review of facility-provided policy titled Obtaining a Fingerstick Glucose Level revealed The purpose of this procedure is to obtain a blood sample to determine the resident's blood glucose level . Verify that there is a physician's order for this procedure . 1. Review of R#34's Face Sheet located in the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-11-14 · 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
Based on observations, staff interviews, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure six of 47 sampled residents (R) (R#68, R#18, R#27, R#53, R#84, and R#34) were monitored for specific behaviors. Findings include: Review of facility policy titled, Assessment of Psychoactive Medication, undated, revealed, Patients who receive antipsychotic, sedative, hypnotic, antidepressant, or any medications prescribed to modify behavior are evaluated to determine the effectiveness of the medication . Based on a comprehensive assessment of a resident, the facility must ensure that . the facility must evaluate the effectiveness of the medications . After initiated or increasing the dose of a psychotropic medication, the behavioral symptoms much be reevaluated periodically to determine the potential for reducing or discontinuing the dose. 1. Review of R#68's Face Sheet located in the electronic medical record (EMR) under the Basic Information tab, revealed an admission date of 4/30/22, with medical diagnoses that included schizoaffective disorder (severe mental illness 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.
- Potential for harm · D2022-11-14 · tag F0838 — failed to assess facility resources and resident needs — isolatedConduct 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on an interview, record reviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to evaluate its resident population and identify the resources needed to provide the necessary care and services to meet the needs of four of four residents (R) (R#6, R#256, R#91, and R#96) requiring tracheostomy (surgical procedure to open a direct airway through an incision in the trachea [windpipe]) care and suctioning (removal of thick mucus and secretions from the trachea and lower airway that cannot be cleared by coughing) on the facility assessment. Findings include: Review of facility-provided policy titled Facility Assessment, undated, revealed A facility assessment is conducted annually to determine and update our capacity to meet the needs of and completely care for our residents during day-to day operations. Determining our capacity to meet the needs of and care for our residents during emergencies is included in this assessment . The facility assessment is intended to help our facility plan for and respond 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.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership Data Not Available |
The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — 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.
This home reported $345K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. 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 115580. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-03-12, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.