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

Westwood Healthcare And Rehabilitation

101 Stockyard Road, Statesboro, GA 30458 · For profit - Corporation · 60 certified beds · (912) 764-6005 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (912) 764-6005 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Behavioral-health or dementia-care citation — no harm found (F0740)
Insights

This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
Worth asking about
  • 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
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
  • its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (1/5)

One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.

A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.

2/5
CMS overall
2 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 3 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 2 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 1 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★ 3/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
337 S Walnut St · (912) 764-2148 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
2425 Northside Dr W · (912) 764-6175 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
2903 W Northside Dr · (912) 764-9452 · Call to confirm hours
Park
585 Martin Luther King Jr Dr · (912) 764-5637 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 1 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 3 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 1 of 5

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 1 to 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating3★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased11.6%15.3%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight11.0%5.6%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.4%0.9%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection2.1%2.5%2.0%typical
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms4.7%11.3%6.5%better
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury1.9%3.2%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened6.8%15.2%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication18.5%20.5%18.9%typical
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%95.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers6.3%5.6%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control12.3%15.8%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table25.0%19.9%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication3.4%2.6%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine95.5%78.4%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission25.1%25.0%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit17.2%11.6%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days5.112.151.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days15.721.901.80worse

§ 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.

11.0%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
39.1%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
not reportedno hours filed
Therapy hours / resident / day

Met the expected recovery: 39.1% 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 23 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: not reported. This home filed no therapist hours at all in its payroll data for this quarter. That is a gap in what it reported, and we do not read it as an absence of therapy — the homes that file nothing here include ones that discharged hundreds of Medicare rehab patients in the very same period, who plainly received therapy from someone. Because we cannot tell a home that under-reports from one that genuinely provides little, this home is left out of the comparison above rather than scored at zero. Ask it directly how many therapist hours a rehab resident gets, and on which days.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNFnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF11.0%CMS range 7.2–15.510.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no 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 discharge39.1%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge47.8%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge39.1%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final dischargenot 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 stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened4.4%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization6.6%CMS range 3.4–11.67.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.091.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

0.33
RN hours/ resident / day
1.11
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.81
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.24
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.41
RN hoursweekends
47.9%
Total nursing turnover
40.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 60 beds and averages 51.3 residents a day — about 86% occupied, or roughly 9 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 3.24 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.33 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.81 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 3.05 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.32 on weekdays — 8% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.30 to 0.41 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 48% is about the same as 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

6
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-05-04)
3
at the previous standard inspection (2023-04-02)

Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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

15 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 5 are one tap away and print in full.

  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-05-04 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — pattern
    Honor 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, staff interviews, and review of the facility policy titled Preventative Maintenance Program, the facility failed to maintain a safe and sanitary environment in nine rooms on two of two halls (Blue Hall and Red Hall). These deficient practices had the potential to place residents at risk of living in an unsanitary and unsafe living environment, and a potential for diminished quality of life. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Preventative Maintenance Program, reviewed 4/1/2024, revealed the Policy section stated, A Preventative Maintenance Program shall be developed and implemented to ensure the provision of a safe, functional, and comfortable environment for residents, staff, and the public. Observation on 5/2/2025 at 8:17 am of the shared bathroom for rooms [ROOM NUMBERS] revealed a dark, black, thick substance around the base of the toilet. In addition, there was a metal drain fixture in the floor of the bathroom that was covered in a dark black substance.…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-05-04 · tag F0628 — isolated
    Provide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on resident and staff interviews, record reviews, and review of the facility's policies titled Bed Hold Notice and Transfer and Discharge, the facility failed to ensure one of 25 sampled residents (R) (R24) was provided with a written bed hold notice or reason for transfer at the time of transfer. This failure had the potential to place the residents or resident representative at risk of being uninformed about their rights related to hospital transfer and subsequent return to the facility. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Bed Hold, reviewed/revised 4/1/2024, revealed the Policy section stated, It is the policy of this facility to provide written information to the resident and/or the resident representative regarding bed hold practices both well in advance, and at the time of, a transfer for hospitalization or therapeutic leave. The Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines section included, 1. As part of the admission packet and at the time of a transfer to the hospital or…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-04 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, staff interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to implement care plans for two of 25 sampled residents (R) (R306 and R13). This deficient practice had the potential to place R306 and R13 at risk of medical complications, unmet needs, and a diminished quality of life. Findings include: 1. Review of R306's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 3/24/2025, revealed Section E (Behaviors) documented physical behaviors toward others occurred one to three days, and other behavior symptoms not directed toward others occurred four to six days of the look-back period. Review of R306's Care Plan Report revealed a 'Focus initiated 10/23/2022 of Behaviors: has combative behaviors. Interventions included that the resident was seen by mental health services. Review of R306's clinical record revealed no documentation of mental health services for the last four months. In an interview on 5/3/2025 at 8:38 am, the Social Worker confirmed R306 had not been referred for behavioral health services as recommended by the Nurse Practitioner (NP). In an interview…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-05-04 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, resident and staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility policy titled Accident and Supervision, the facility failed to ensure an environment free of accident hazards for three of 25 sampled residents (R) (R21, R25, and R18). This deficient practice had the potential to place R21, R25, and R18 at risk of avoidable accidents. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Accident and Supervision, dated 4/1/2024, revealed the Policy section stated, The resident environment will remain free of accident hazards as is possible. Each resident will receive adequate supervision and assistive devices to prevent accidents. This includes. 1. Identifying hazards (s) and risks(s). 2. Evaluating and analyzing hazards(s) and risk(s) 3. Implementing interventions to reduce hazards and risks. 4. Monitoring for effectiveness and modifying interventions when necessary. The Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines included, 1. Identification of Hazards and Risks - the process…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-04 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, staff interviews, record reviews, and review of the facility's policy titled Oxygen Administration, the facility failed to ensure that the physician's order for oxygen administration was followed for one of 10 residents (R) (R13) reviewed for oxygen administration. The deficient practice had the potential to place the resident at risk for medical complications, unmet needs, and a diminished quality of life. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Oxygen Administration, dated reviewed/revised 4/1/2025, revealed the section titled Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines included, 1. Oxygen is administered under the orders of a physician, except in the case of an emergency. Review of R13's clinical record revealed diagnoses including, but not limited to, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (acute) exacerbation and acute respiratory failure with hypoxia. Review of 13's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 4/22/2025, revealed Section J (Health Conditions) documented that the resident exhibited shortness of breath.…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-05-04 · tag F0740 — failed to provide behavioral / mental-health care — isolated
    Ensure each resident must receive and the facility must provide necessary behavioral health care and services.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility policy titled Behavioral Health Services, the facility failed to ensure one of 25 sampled residents (R) (R306) received behavioral health services to address behaviors. The deficient practice had the potential to place R306 at risk for medical complications, unmet needs, and a diminished quality of life. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Behavioral Health Services, reviewed/revised 4/1/2024, revealed the Policy section stated, It is policy of this facility to ensure all residents receive necessary behavioral health services to assist them in reaching and maintaining their highest level of mental and psychosocial functioning and well-being. The Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines section included, 3. The facility will ensure that necessary behavioral health care services are person-centered and reflect the resident's goal for care, while maximizing the residents' dignity, autonomy, privacy, socialization, independence, choice, and safety. Review of R306's clinical record revealed…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2023-04-02 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespread
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interviews, record review, and review of facility policy titled Infection Prevention and Control Program the facility failed to maintain an effective infection prevention and control program that demonstrated ongoing surveillance, recognition, investigation, and control of infection to prevent the onset and spread of infection and failed to implement a procedure to reduce the risk of growth and spread of Legionella and other opportunistic pathogens in the building water system. The facility census was 52. Findings include: Review of facility's policy titled Infection Prevention and Control Program with date implemented 2/2/2022: Policy: This facility has established and maintains an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines: 1. The designated Infection Preventionist is responsible for oversight of the program and serves as a consultant to our staff on infectious diseases,…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-04-02 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — pattern
    Develop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, record review, and review of facility policy titled Infection Prevention and Control Program the facility failed to provide evidence that residents were offered the Influenza and/or Pneumococcal vaccine for three residents (R#11, R#6, and R#50) of five sampled residents reviewed for immunizations. Findings include: Review of facility's policy titled Infection Prevention and Control Program with date implemented 2/2/2022: Influenza and Pneumococcal Immunization: a. Residents will be offered the influenza vaccine each year between October 1 and March 31, unless contraindicated or received the vaccine elsewhere during that time. b. Residents will be offered the pneumococcal vaccines recommended by the CDC upon admission, unless contraindicated or received the vaccines elsewhere. c. Education will be provided to the residents and/or representatives regarding the benefits and potential side effects of the immunizations prior to offering the vaccines. d. Residents will have the opportunity 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-04-02 · tag F0887 — pattern
    Educate residents and staff on COVID-19 vaccination, offer the COVID-19 vaccine to eligible residents and staff after education, and properly document each resident and staff member's vaccination status.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, record reviews, and review of facility policy titled Infection Prevention and Control Program the facility failed to ensure that three residents (R#6, R#11, and R#50) of five sampled residents were offered, received, and had documentation related to the COVID-19 vaccine. Findings include: Review of facility's policy titled Infection Prevention and Control Program with date implemented 2/2/2022: Policy: This facility has established and maintains an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines: 8. COVID-19 Immunizations: a. Residents and staff will be offered the COVID-19 vaccine when vaccine supplies are available to the facility. b. Residents and staff will be screened prior to offering the vaccination for prior immunization, medical precautions, and contraindications to determine candidacy…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2021-08-26 · tag F0882 — widespread
    Designate a qualified infection preventionist to be responsible for the infection prevent and control program in the nursing home.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on staff interviews and review of facility policy titled Visitation and Infection Control Policy, the facility failed to designate a qualified infection preventionist who completed specialized training in infection prevention and control. The deficient practice placed all 49 residents at risk for potential transmission of COVID-19 infections and other communicable diseases. Findings include: Interview on 8/24/21 at 10:25 a.m. with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) CC revealed no clear knowledge of who the infection preventionist was for the facility. Interview on 8/24/21 at 10:45 a.m. with the Director of Nursing (DON) revealed the infection preventionist was the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON). Further interview revealed that the DON was new to the facility and did have certification as an infection control preventionist but could not provide information pertaining to certification. Interview with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) FF on 8/24/21 at 11:15 a.m. revealed she had no knowledge of who was over the infection control program for the facility. Interview on 8/24/21 at…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
Show the remaining 5 citations
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2021-08-26 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, review of facility policy titled Visitation and Infection Control, and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure that infection control practices were followed and adhered to by facility staff. Specifically, the facility failed to provide Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) for staff use for one resident on observation isolation (room [ROOM NUMBER]) and failed to ensure that infection control practices were followed by staff during meal service on the COVID isolation unit. The deficient practice had the potential to affect 19 residents residing on the Blue Hall within the facility. Total census was 49. Findings include: 1. Observation on 8/24/21 at 9:15 a.m. revealed one resident was on observation isolation due to hospital return. There was no PPE equipment noted outside of room [ROOM NUMBER] (observation only resident), and one gown was noted hanging on the light fixture by the door. There was only one resident in this room. There were no other PPE supplies noted in the room at the…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2021-08-26 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and resident/staff interviews, the facility failed to allow one of 20 sampled residents (R) (R#31) the choice of when she could take a shower and failed to facilitate that choice in a bathing schedule. Findings include: During an initial interview conducted on 8/24/21 at 9:00 a.m., R#31 stated she prefers a morning shower but is on the 3-11 p.m. shower schedule. R#31 stated she use to receive her shower in the mornings, but they switched her showers to the afternoon. She stated she told an unnamed staff that her preference is to take her shower in the mornings. She stated that unnamed staff told her that she would have to stay on the 3-11 p.m. shower schedule. R#31 further stated unnamed staff told her she does not have a choice as to when she receives her shower. Review of the clinical record revealed R#31 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Bipolar Disorder, unspecified, Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus without…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-08-26 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolated
    Honor 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, staff interviews, and review of facility policy titled Detailed Cleaning, the facility failed to ensure that there was a clean and comfortable environment as evidence by stained privacy curtains, over bed lighting not properly affixed to the wall, large brown stains on the floor, holes in closet door, missing tiles in the bathroom, a cracked trash can, and metal door frame in shared bathroom had a piece of protruding metal at the base. These environmental concerns were observed in 12 of 49 resident rooms and/or bathrooms (106, 108, 110, 112, 117, 118, 119, 120, 125, 126, 127, and 128). Findings include: Observation on 8/24/21 at 8:56 a.m. revealed room [ROOM NUMBER] privacy curtain had a large brown stain in the middle of the curtain at the bottom by the hem. Observation on 8/24/21 at 9:00 a.m. of room [ROOM NUMBER]B revealed two holes in the wall behind the bed as well as a large brown spot on the floor streaming from A bed to the B bed. Observation on 8/24/21 at 9:02 a.m. of room [ROOM…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-08-26 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, review of facility policy titled Care Plans, Comprehensive Person-Centered, and staff interviews, the facility failed to follow the respiratory care plan for one of five residents (R) (#27) who required continuous oxygen. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Care Plans, Comprehensive Person-Centered revised 2016 revealed the Interdisciplinary Team (IDT), in conjunction with the resident and his/her family or legal representative, develops and implements a comprehensive, person-centered care plan for each resident. Review of Face Sheet revealed R#27 was admitted into the facility on 2/13/20 with a secondary diagnosis of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD). The Minimum Data Set (MDS) Quarterly assessment dated [DATE] documented R#27 receives oxygen therapy while a resident at the facility. Review of the care plan dated 7/7/21 revealed R#27 was at risk for ineffective breathing pattern with interventions including but not limited to administering…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-08-26 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide 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 review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure that a resident received oxygen at the correct flow rate for one of five residents (R) (#27) who required continuous oxygen. Findings include: Review of Face Sheet revealed R#27 was admitted into the facility on 2/13/20 with a secondary diagnosis of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD). The Minimum Data Set (MDS) Quarterly assessment dated [DATE] documented R#27 receives oxygen therapy while a resident at the facility. Review of the current August 2021 Physicians Orders for R#27 revealed an order with a start date of 8/19/20 for oxygen at 3 lpm (liters per minute) via nasal cannula for a diagnosis of COPD. Review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) dated 8/4/21 through 8/5/21 revealed oxygen was delivered at 3 lpm via nasal cannula with no interruptions. Observations on 8/24/21 at 9:52 a.m., 8/24/21 at 12:04 p.m., and 8/25/21 at 1:41 p.m., it was revealed R#27 was on oxygen via nasal cannula. However, the…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
OBERLANDER, ZALMENIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL50%since 12/01/2019
SILBERSTEIN, ARIIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL50%since 12/01/2019
WHITE, LAURAIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 12/01/2019

CMS files one row per role, so the 7 rows in the source record cover these 3 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

$5.0M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-22.7%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$940K
Related-party expense15% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 78%Medicare 7%Other / private 14%

About 78% 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 $940K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 15% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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

$319per resident / day
operating cost
$9,705per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$260per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in GA

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Georgia Medicaid page.

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

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 115601. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-05-04, 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.

What to do next