D Scott Hudgens Center For Skilled Nursing, The
3500 Annandale Lane, Suwanee, GA 30024 · Non profit - Corporation · 32 certified beds · (770) 932-3472 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (33% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- the CMS record shows $4,017 in federal fines (most recent 2024-06-16)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 2 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 2 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 2 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 2 to 5 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 | 22.2% | 15.3% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 11.5% | 5.6% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.8% | 0.9% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 2.5% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 11.3% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 6.6% | 0.1% | 0.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 3.3% | 3.2% | 3.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 27.5% | 15.2% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 19.4% | 20.5% | 18.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 96.9% | 95.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 8.1% | 5.6% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 29.8% | 15.8% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 34.7% | 19.9% | 17.1% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.89 | 2.15 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.09 | 1.90 | 1.80 | better |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.41 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 71% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 2% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.00 | 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 32 beds and averages 29.9 residents a day — about 93% occupied, or roughly 2 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.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 4.06 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.61 on weekdays — 12% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.86 to 0.53 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 33% is below the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
10 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Potential for harm · D2025-09-18 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolatedKeep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility's policy titled, Confidentiality of Information and Personal Privacy, the facility failed to ensure the privacy of resident's health information for two of 14 sampled residents (R) (R16 and R4). The deficient practice created the potential for residents' health information to be accessed by unauthorized personnel and visitors.Findings include:Observation on 9/17/2025 at 9:15 am revealed Registered Nurse (RN) AA walked away from the medication cart which was in the resident hallway, facing away from the resident's room, leaving R16's information on the electronic medication administration record (eMAR) visible on the medication cart unattended.Observation on 9/17/2025 at 9:53 am, RN AA left the medication cart unattended in the common area with prepared medications on the med cart table with the eMAR screen visible to other residents and visitors of R4's information.Interview on 9/17/2025 at 12:15 pm with nurse RN AA confirmed that she forgot to minimize the eMAR screen while unattended during…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-09-18 · 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, staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility's policy titled, Administering Medications, the facility failed to ensure the medication cart located on the 200 hallway was locked when unattended during medication pass. The deficient practice created the potential for residents, unauthorized staff and visitors to have access to medication stored on the medication cart.Findings include:Review of the facility's policy titled Administering Medications, revised April 2019 under Policy Interpretation and Implementation, statement 19, During administration of medication, the medication cart is kept closed and locked when out of sight of the medication nurse or aide. It may be kept in the doorway of the resident's room, with open drawers facing inward and all other sides closed. No medications are kept on top of the cart. The cart must be clearly visible to the personnel administering medications, and all outward sides must be inaccessible to residents or others passing by.Observation on 9/17/2025 at 9:15 am revealed Registered Nurse (RN) AA walked away…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-06-16 · tag F0851 — widespreadElectronically submit to CMS complete and accurate direct care staffing information, based on payroll and other verifiable and auditable data.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interviews, record review, and review of the PBJ (Payroll Based Journal) [NAME] Report for First Quarter (Q1) of fiscal year 2024 (October 1-December 31), the facility failed to accurately report its staffing data to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) related to Registered Nurse (RN) coverage and Licensed Nursing Coverage 24 hours a day. The facility census was 31 residents. Findings include: Review of the PBJ [NAME] Report for Q1 2021, October 1 through December 31, revealed the facility reported data, which declared there was no coverage by a RN for at least eight hours for the following dates: 1. October 7, October 8, October 21, and October 22. 2. December 2, December 3, December 30, and December 31. Review of the PBJ [NAME] Report for Q1 2021, October 1 through December 31, revealed the facility reported data, which declared there was no coverage by Licensed Nursing Coverage 24 hours a day for the following dates: 1. December 27, December 28, December 29, December 30, and December 31. Review of the facility's staffing hours and payroll verification…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2024-06-16 · tag F0882 — widespreadDesignate 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 the facility's policies titled, Infection Prevention and Control Program and [Name of the Facility] Position Description, the facility failed to have a qualified Infection Preventionist who had completed the required specialized training in infection prevention and control. This failure placed all residents at risk for the potential transmission of infections and communicable diseases. The facility census was 31 residents. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Infection Prevention and Control Program dated 10/23/2023 under the section titled, Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines: revealed, Number one, The designated Infection Preventionist (IP) is responsible for oversight of the program and serves as a consultant to our staff on infectious diseases, resident room placement, implementing isolation precautions, staff and resident exposures, surveillance, and epidemiological investigations of exposures of infectious diseases Number 16. Staff Education: (a.) All staff shall receive training, relevant to their specific…
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 before2024-06-16 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff interviews, and review of the facility's policy titled, Comprehensive Care Plans, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive person-centered care plan for two of 18 sampled residents (R) (R13 and R29). This deficient practice had the potential for the residents not to receive treatment and/or care according to their needs. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Comprehensive Care Plans, dated 10/23/2023, under the section titled, Policy revealed, It is the policy of this facility to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with resident rights, that include measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the resident's comprehensive assessment. Under the section titled, Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines for Number two revealed, The comprehensive care plan will be developed within seven days after rhe completion of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-05-11 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — patternDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interviews, record review, and a review of the facility's policies titled Resident Rights and Advance Directive and Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) Policy, the facility failed to develop a Comprehensive Care Plan to address one of 13 residents (#22) that had facility acquired wounds and failed to develop a Comprehensive Care Plan to address the code status for four of 13 residents (#5, #11, #20 and #27). Findings include: Review of the Policy titled Resident Rights: Federal and State Law, last revised on 4/2014, revealed that the resident has the right to be fully informed in advance about care and treatment and of any changes in that care or treatment that may affect the resident's well-being and unless adjudged incompetent or otherwise found to be incapacitated under the laws of the State, participate in planning care and treatment or changes in care and treatment. It also revealed that the resident has the right to formulate an advanced directive. The facility was unable to provide a policy for care planning. Review of the policy titled Advance Directive and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-05-11 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — patternHave a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interviews, record review, and a review of the facility's policy titled, Nurse Staffing Sufficiency, the facility failed to provide the services of a Registered Nurse (RN) for at least eight consecutive hours a day, for seven days a week for three days (4/1/2023, 4/8/2023 and 4/30/2023) of a 30-day review. Findings include: A review of the policy titled Nurse Staffing Sufficiency, revealed the requirements of a sufficiently nurse-staffed unit. 10. The facility has the services of an RN available eight consecutive hours a day, seven days a week. A review of the past 30 days of Daily Staffing posts revealed there was no RN on duty for a minimum of eight consecutive hours per day on 4/1/2023, 4/8/2023, and 4/30/2023. A review of the Daily Nurse Staffing posted for 4/1/2023, revealed that no RN worked in the building for eight consecutive hours on that date. A review of the Daily Nurse Staffing posted on 4/8/2023, revealed that no RN worked in the building for eight consecutive hours on that date. A review of the Daily Nurse Staffing posted on 4/30/2023, revealed that no…
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 · D2023-05-11 · tag F0622 — isolatedNot transfer or discharge a resident without an adequate reason; and must provide documentation and convey specific information when a resident is transferred or discharged.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interviews, record review, and a review of the facility's policy titled Transfer and Discharge (including AMA), the facility failed to document in the resident's medical record the basis for transfer to the assisted living facility. Findings include: Review of the policy titled Transfer and Discharge (including AMA) not dated, under the section titled Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines number six sub-titled Non-Emergency Transfers or Discharges sub-section j revealed the physician shall document medial reasons for transfer/discharge in the medial record and a copy of the physician order for discharge should be attached to the discharge notice. Record review of the Electronic Medical Record (EMR) for R#29 under physician orders revealed there was not an order for discharge from the facility. Record review of the progress notes for R#29 revealed a discharge note entered by the nurse on 2/14/2023 at 2:50 p.m. There was no entry made by the physician related to a discharge summary found in the record. There was no entry found in the EMR regarding discharge…
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 · D2023-05-11 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure that Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments were accurate for one of 13 residents (R) (#22) for the presence of facility-acquired pressure ulcers. Findings Include: Record review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) for R#22 dated 4/24/2023 revealed in section M that the resident did not have any unhealed or any wounds present. Record review of the Treatment Administration Record (TAR) for April 2023 revealed that the orders for dressing changes for sacral and right buttocks wound were ordered on 4/12/2023 and was started on 4/13/2023. The orders for treatment and dressing changes for the left elbow were started on 4/17/2023. Interview on 5/11/2023 at 10:41 a.m. with Director of Nursing (DON) revealed that the facility does have a nurse that works remotely for the assessments, but all the nurses are responsible for care plans. A phone interview on 5/11/2023 at 11:31 a.m. with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) Minimum Data Set (MDS)…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-05-11 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, resident and staff interviews, record reviews, and a review of the facility's policy titled Resident Personal Care, the facility failed to provide activities of daily living (ADL) care related to dependent residents for two of 13 residents (R) (#21 and #180) sampled. Findings include: Review of the policy titled Resident Personal Care revealed multiple policies are included. The policy titled Bed Bath, giving a, stated the purpose of the bed bath is to provide comfort, stimulate circulation, provide mild form of exercise, observation of skin condition, and relax muscles. This policy gives step by step instruction of how to give a bed bath and when to call for nurse to assess the resident. The section titled Shower/Tub Bath revealed the purpose was to promote cleanliness, comfort, relaxation, stimulate circulation, and observe skin condition. This policy also gives step by step instruction of how to give a shower/tub bath, when to notify the charge nurse, and how to transport the resident to the shower/bathtub. The policy titled Hair Care, assistance with…
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
$4,017 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $4,017 — penalty dated 2024-06-16
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership Data Not Available |
The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2024). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in GA
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Georgia Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 115690. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-09-18, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.