Nhc Healthcare Rossville
1425 McFarland Ave, Rossville, GA 30741 · For profit - Corporation · 112 certified beds · (706) 861-0863 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has abuse, neglect, or exploitation citations (F0600, F0602, F0609, F0610) — most recent Mar 2024
- inspectors cited 4 immediate-jeopardy problems — the most serious level
- inspectors recorded 1 serious finding as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (15) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $57,077 in federal fines (most recent 2024-03-08)
- its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (58%) runs well above the national median (45%)
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) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's staffing and quality-measure ratings run 4 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, and staffing on its payroll (PBJ) submissions — 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 | 5 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 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 | 5.3% | 15.3% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 4.1% | 5.6% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.9% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 2.0% | 2.5% | 2.0% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 3.4% | 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 | 1.9% | 3.2% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 7.6% | 15.2% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 32.0% | 20.5% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 97.5% | 95.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 2.6% | 5.6% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 16.4% | 15.8% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 20.5% | 19.9% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.7% | 2.6% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 88.0% | 78.4% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 17.7% | 25.0% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 8.1% | 11.6% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.49 | 2.15 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.47 | 1.90 | 1.80 | better |
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
62.4% 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 34 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 85.7% 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 42 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 0.26 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 38% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 1% 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 | 62.4%CMS range 45.7–74.8 | 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 | 11.5%CMS range 8.2–17.1 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 85.7% | 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 | 83.3% | 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 | 81.0% | 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 | 100.0% | 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 | 79.3% | 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 | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 6.7%CMS range 3.8–13.1 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.08 | 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 112 beds and averages 97.2 residents a day — about 87% occupied, or roughly 15 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
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 3.10 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.62 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.83 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.69 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.27 on weekdays — 18% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.73 to 0.36 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 58% is well above the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
15 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Immediate jeopardy · L2024-03-08 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — widespreadTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to identify and report abuse including an injury of unknown source, and misappropriation of property for four of 29 sampled residents (R) (R245, R74, R6, and R70). The facility's nursing staff reported incidents of abuse directly to the facility's Director of Nursing (DON) and the facility's Director of Social Services (DSS); however, neither identified the incidents as abuse nor reported the abuse to the State Survey Agency (SSA). Additionally, a resident reported to the DSS that she was missing money; however, the DSS did not identify the resident's missing money as an incident of possible misappropriation and report the possible misappropriation to the SSA. These systemic failures had the potential to affect all residents and future residents of the facility. On 3/7/2024, a determination was made that a situation in which the facility's noncompliance with one or more requirements of participation had caused or had the likelihood to cause, serious injury, harm, impairment, or death to residents. 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.
- Immediate jeopardy · L2024-03-08 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — widespreadRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to investigate incidents of abuse, misappropriation, and injury of unknown source for five of 29 sampled residents (R) (R245, R74, R6, and R70, and R56). Additionally, the facility failed to prevent further abuse and possible abuse to all residents of the facility by failing to investigate. The facility's nursing staff reported incidents of abuse directly to the facility's Director of Nursing (DON) and the facility's Director of Social Services (DSS); however, neither investigated the incidents of abuse, misappropriation, or the injury of unknown source. These systemic failures had the potential to affect all residents and future residents of the facility. On 3/7/2024, a determination was made that a situation in which the facility's noncompliance with one or more requirements of participation had caused or had the likelihood to cause, serious injury, harm, impairment, or death to residents. The facility's Administrator, Director of Nursing, and the Senior [NAME] President were informed of the Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) 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 · L2024-03-08 · tag F0835 — failed to run the facility competently — widespreadAdminister 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, record review, and review of the facility's Director of Nursing's (DONs) and the Director of Social Services (DSS) Job Descriptions, the facility failed to be administered in a manner that enabled effective use of its resources to attain and maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident. This failure had the likelihood of affecting all residents of the facility. The facility's administration failed to maintain standard levels of care and services for its residents when Immediate Jeopardies were identified at F600-J, F609-L, and F610-L. 1. The facility's administration failed to ensure residents remained free from abuse when the facility's nursing staff identified and reported incidents of resident-to-resident abuse to the DON and the DSS. Neither the DON nor the DSS identified the incidents as abuse. No action was taken, and residents continued to sustain abuse from other residents. 2. The facility's administration failed to ensure the incidents of abuse, misappropriation, and injury of unknown sources were…
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 · K2024-03-08 · 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 interview, record review, and review of the facility's policy, the facility failed to ensure four of 29 sampled residents (R) (R245, R74, R6, and R70) were free from abuse. The facility's administration was aware of incidents where either abuse occurred or incidents of possible abuse; however, the facility did not act to protect the residents from abuse. The facility's failure had affected and/or had the likelihood to affect residents of the facility including any future admissions to the facility. On [DATE], a determination was made that a situation in which the facility's noncompliance with one or more requirements of participation had caused or had the likelihood to cause, serious injury, harm, impairment, or death to residents. The facility's Administrator, Director of Nursing, and the Senior [NAME] President were informed of the Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) on [DATE] at 5:47 pm. The noncompliance related to the IJ was identified to have existed on [DATE]. The facility presented an acceptable plan 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.
- Actual harm · G2024-03-08 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to transfer a resident with the correct transfer lift and with the assistance of two staff during routine care for one of five residents (R) (R29) reviewed for falls. This failure resulted in harm when R29 fell and required sutures to the top of the skull. The findings constituted past noncompliance, as the facility implemented a plan of correction. Findings included: A review of a policy provided by the facility titled NHC Rossville Falls Program, dated January 2024, failed to address Hoyer lift transfers. A review of the Profile Face Sheet, located in the electronic medical record (EMR) under the Profile tab indicated that R29 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included cerebral infarction (stroke) affecting right side, visual disturbance, difficulty walking, lack of coordination/gross motor skills, and anticoagulant use (blood thinner). A review of R29's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) located in the EMR under 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 · E2024-03-08 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — patternProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure to ensure urinary catheter bags were properly positioned in a manner to prevent potential urinary tract infections due to contamination for three of five residents (Residents (R)8, R9, and R87) reviewed for urinary catheters and urinary tract infections out of a total sample of 29 residents. Findings include: Review of the facility's undated policy titled, Catheter Care, revealed Indwelling catheter care will be performed at least once daily .Provide privacy for the resident. Complete hand hygiene .Replace the cover over the resident. Clean and return equipment as indicated. 1. Review of the Resident Face Sheet, located in the electronic medical record (EMR) under the Resident tab, documented R8 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and had diagnoses that included neuromuscular dysfunction of bladder. Review of R8's five day Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment located in the EMR under the RAI tab with an Assessment…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-08 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolatedProtect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
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 interview, record review, and review of the facility's policy, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from misappropriation for one of 30 sampled residents (Resident (R) 56). R56 reported to the Director of Social Services (DSS) that she was missing money; however, the DSS failed to ensure the resident was protected from further misappropriation. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Patient Protection and Response Policy for Allegations/Incidents of Abuse, Neglect, Misappropriation of Property and Exploitation, revised 02/01/23 revealed, .1. Definition Policy. Abuse, Neglect, Misappropriation of Patient Property and exploitation, as hereafter defined, will not be tolerated by anyone, including staff, patients, consultants, volunteers .The patient has the right to be free from abuse, neglect, misappropriation of patient property, and exploitation .Misappropriation of Patient Property: the deliberate misplacement, exploitation, or wrongful, temporary or permanent use of a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-03-08 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure that respiratory equipment was cleaned, stored, and/or administered per facility policy for two of 29 sampled residents (R) (R25 and R23). Staff failed to clean and air-dry nebulizer equipment between uses, failed to assess R25 prior to and after the nebulizer treatment, and failed to ensure R25's nebulizer machine was clean. Findings included: A review of the undated policy titled Oral Inhalation Administration, dated 1/1/2019, documented obtain a baseline pulse, respiratory rate, and lung sounds .obtain a post-treatment, pulse, respiratory rate, and lung sounds, and document findings on the Medication Administration Record (MAR) or in the resident's medical record, rinse the equipment, and when equipment is completely dry, store in a plastic bag with the resident's name and the date on it . 1. A review of the Resident Face Sheet, located in the electronic medical record (EMR) under the Resident tab, documented R25…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-08 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure pharmacy services thoroughly reviewed the resident medication regimens to identify irregularities related to the use of trazodone, an antidepressant and sedative, for one of six residents (R) (R70) reviewed for unnecessary medication. Findings included: A review of a document provided by the facility titled Medication Monitoring and Management, dated 1/1/2019, indicated In order to optimize the therapeutic benefit of medication therapy and minimize or prevent potential adverse consequences, facility staff, the attending physician/prescriber, and the consultant pharmacist perform ongoing monitoring for appropriate, effective, and safe medication use . A review of a document provided by the facility titled Drug Regimen Review for [NAME] Health Care Facility, dated 2/1/2021, indicated . To ensure timely pharmacist conducted drug regimen review (DRR) for every resident, including guidelines for documentation and communication 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-08 · 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 observations, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure that one of six residents (R) (R70) reviewed for unnecessary medication use received antipsychotic medication at the appropriate time of day. Findings included: Upon entrance the facility on 3/4/2024 at 8:45 AM, R70 was observed in the dining room which is also used for activities asleep in her wheelchair. Every morning on 3/4/2024 through 3/8/2024, R70 was observed asleep during activities that took place starting at 10:00 AM. A review of R70's undated admission Record, located in the electronic medical record (EMR) under the Profile tab, revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included dementia, anxiety, and major depressive disorder. A review of R70's Physician Order's, located in the resident's EMR under the Orders tab, revealed an order dated 7/11/2023 for trazodone tablet; 150 mg; 1/2 tab 75mg; oral; once a day at 8:00 AM for insomnia. This was prescribed by the nurse practitioner.…
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 · F2023-01-19 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility's policies titled, Safety & Sanitation Best Practice Guidelines, Dry Storage and Safety and Sanitation Best Practice Guidelines (subject) Refrigerator and Freezer Storage, the facility failed to maintain sanitary conditions in the dietary kitchen. This deficient practice had the potential to adversely affect 89 of 91 residents that received meal trays from the kitchen. Findings include: Review of the policy titled Safety and Sanitation Best Practice Guidelines (subject) Dry Storage with the original date 2003 and reviewed/revised date of November 2017 revealed no chemical or cleaners may be stored in the dry food storage area. The best practice regarding herbs and spices is to use within one year of purchase date. Foods will be stored in original package if possible. Scoops should be stored in a sanitary method with handles of scoops not contacting food. A designated area in or near the storeroom should be labeled for dented cans…
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 · F2023-01-19 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — widespreadMake sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
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 maintain effective pest control in the kitchen with the potential to affect all 89 of 91 residents receiving oral feedings. Findings include: An observation on 1/17/2023 at 10:00 a.m. revealed a tray with a paper liner on a shelf in the dry storage area which spices were stored upon, had black, oblong shaped substances on the paper liner all around the spices. A five pound bag of cocoa was observed stored in a cannister dated as opened on 9/1 with black, oblong shaped substances on the lid of the cannister. An observation on 1/18/2023 at 1:45 p.m. revealed a mouse trap in the main kitchen behind the tilt skillet and a bait station on the floor at the back door. Review of the pest control company's Customer Service Report revealed the service included pesticide application of alpine to the kitchen, performed exterior rodent service, checked accessible rodent stations and cleaned/reset traps as needed, checked bait stations, and replaced bait as needed. The service was provided monthly 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 · Dcited before2023-01-19 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, resident and staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility policy titled, NHC Respiratory Manual, the facility failed to maintain bilevel positive airway pressure (BiPAP) equipment in a sanitary manner for two of four sampled residents (R) (R#59 and R#21). The deficient practice had the potential to affect R#59 and R#21 who were receiving positive airway pressure (PAP) therapy. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, NHC Respiratory Manual, Section II Procedures; Section H, Subject: Monitoring Devices (revised October 2013), revealed the following: Infection Control: the mask should be cleaned daily with soap and water; headgear should be cleaned when soiled with soap and water; hose needs to be cleaned with soap and water weekly; change filters as recommended by manufacturer. 1. Review of the electronic medical record (EMR) for R#59 revealed she admitted with diagnoses to include chronic respiratory failure (CRF) with hypoxia, chronic respiratory failure…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-01-19 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interviews, record review, and review of the policy titled, Specific Medication Administering Procedures, the facility failed to ensure the medication error rate was less than 5%. There were four errors with 27 opportunities for one of seven residents (R) (R#40) for a medication error rate of 14.81%. Findings include: Review of the policy titled, Specific Medication Administering Procedures dated 1/1/2019, revealed the policy: To administer medications in a safe and effective manner. The procedures sections revealed: C. 1) Prior to removing the medication package/container from the cart/drawer; a. Check medication administration record/treatment administration record (MAR/TAR) for order. 2) Prior to removing the medication from the container; a. Check the label against the order on the MAR. Observation of medication administration on 1/18/2023 at 9:05 a.m. on the North Hall with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) BB revealed her to check the MARS for R#40 and remove the following medications from the cart: one amlodipine (a medication used to treat…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-01-19 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and review of the facility's policies titled, Medication Storage in the Facility and Specific Medication Administration Procedures, the facility failed to ensure that medications were properly labeled on two of two medication carts (North Hall cart and South Hall cart). Specifically, an intravenous (IV) medication bag did not contain a label with the name of the medication, the date and time of the infusion, or the nurse's name or initials and an opened box of ophthalmic (eye) drops were without an open date or a discard date labeled on the box or container. Findings include: Review of the policy titled, Medication Storage in the Facility dated 1/1/2019 revealed the policy statement of: Medications and biologicals are stored safely, securely, and properly, following manufacturer's recommendations or those of the supplier. Procedures section titled Infusion Therapy Storage and Labeling: F: Facility should assure that infusion therapy labels include the: 1) Resident name, medication name, 2) Volume, infusion rate, 3) Name and quantity of each…
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
$57,077 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $57,077 — penalty dated 2024-03-08
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 NATIONAL HEALTHCARE CORPORATION — 69 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 2 of 5 | 4.0 | -2.0 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 1 of 5 | 3.5 | -2.5 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 3.5 | -0.5 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.4 | +0.6 vs chain |
The other 68 homes this chain runs (chain average 4.0★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 68; 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
CMS ownership filings flag an owner of this facility as an investment firm. That’s a fact worth knowing about who ultimately profits from the home. Read the inspection and staffing record above on its own merits.
- MORGAN STANLEY — investment firm · 5.30% share · 5% Or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest
- VANGUARD GROUP INC — investment firm · 9.00% share · 5% Or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest
Source: CMS SNF ownership filings (PECOS). These flags are self-reported and undercount — federal auditors (GAO) and researchers find CMS captures only a fraction of true private-equity and REIT ties, so the absence of a flag on other homes is not proof they lack investor owners. How investor ownership affects care →
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| NHC/DELAWARE INC | Organization | DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 01/01/2002 |
| MORGAN STANLEY INSTITUTIONAL ADVISORS LLC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 11/08/2024 |
| BIDWELL, GREGORY | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 01/01/2002 |
| NATIONAL HEALTHCARE CORPORATION | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2002 |
| NHC-OP LP | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2002 |
| DODSON, VICKI | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2019 |
| HARNDEN, CELESTE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/01/2023 |
| KIDD, BRIAN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2017 |
| SALYERS, MARINDA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/29/2025 |
| SHEFFIELD, ALEXANDER | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 09/20/2013 |
| USSERY, ROBERT | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 01/01/2002 |
| BLACKROCK INC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/20/2019 |
| DIMENSIONAL FUND ADVISORS LP | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/07/2023 |
| MORGAN STANLEY | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/08/2024 |
| NATIONAL HEALTH CORPORATION | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2002 |
| VANGUARD GROUP INC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/27/2017 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 24 rows in the source record cover these 16 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.
9 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 76% 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 $438K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in GA
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 115104. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-09-04, 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.