Providence Healthcare
1011 South Green Street, Thomaston, GA 30286 · For profit - Individual · 110 certified beds · (706) 647-6693 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (33% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- CMS has flagged it for abuse
- it has abuse, neglect, or exploitation citations (F0600, F0606, F0609) — most recent Mar 2026
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has 3 actual-harm citations
- a high number of inspection citations overall (20) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (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.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 4 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 5 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 2 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 15.1% | 15.3% | 15.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 2.5% | 5.6% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.9% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.4% | 2.5% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 9.8% | 11.3% | 6.5% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 1.8% | 3.2% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 20.4% | 15.2% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 23.8% | 20.5% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 92.1% | 95.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 2.6% | 5.6% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 20.5% | 15.8% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 22.4% | 19.9% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 2.6% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 12.5% | 78.4% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 6.4% | 25.0% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 2.1% | 11.6% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.27 | 2.15 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.60 | 1.90 | 1.80 | better |
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
43.9% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 33 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 63.3% 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 30 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.20 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 23% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 34% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 43.9%CMS range 28.6–62.0 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.4%CMS range 7.1–16.7 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 63.3% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 46.7% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 60.0% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 97.7% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 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 | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 9.1% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 6.9%CMS range 3.5–11.2 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.08 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 110 beds and averages 74.6 residents a day — about 68% occupied, or roughly 35 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. 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 2.74 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.18 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.56 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.49 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 2.84 on weekdays — 12% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.20 to 0.12 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%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
20 citations, most serious first. The 13 most serious are shown; the remaining 7 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · G2026-03-25 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, staff interviews, and review of the facility policy titled Freedom of Abuse - Abuse Prevention Fast Alert and the Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) job description, the facility failed to assess and provide wound care in a timely manner to one resident (R) (R9) reviewed for wound care. On 2/21/2026, actual harm occurred when CNA BB neglected to provide (R9) adequate incontinent care, resulting in R9 developing a blister on the left upper thigh. R9 required a debridement to remove necrotic tissue on 3/5/2026. The sample size was 9.Findings include: Review of the policy titled Freedom of Abuse Abuse Prevention Fast Alert dated 1/2025 revealed. Policy: The purpose of this written Freedom of Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation; Abuse Prevention Standard is to outline the preventive and action steps taken to reduce the potential for abuse, mistreatment, and neglect of residents. Neglect: Failure of a facility, its employees, or service providers to provide goods and services to a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2026-03-25 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, interviews, and review of the facility policy titled Freedom Of Abuse Abuse Prevention Fast Alert the facility failed to ensure an allegations of neglect was reported to the State Survey Agency (SSA) within the required time frame for one Resident (R) (R9) of nine sampled residents. Resident (R9) verbally and via text reported to the facility that one Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) BB neglected to provide her (R9) adequate incontinent care. As a result, R9 developed a blister on the left upper thigh. Due to the delay in care the blister progressed to an open wound.Findings include: Review of the policy titled Freedom Of Abuse Abuse Prevention Fast Alert dated 1/2025. Policy: The purpose of this written Freedom of Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation; Abuse Prevention Standard is to outline the preventive and action steps taken to reduce the potential for abuse, mistreatment, and neglect of residents. Reporting/Investigation/Response Policy: Any complaint, allegation, observation, 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.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2026-03-25 · 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 observation, record review, interviews, and review of the facility policy titled RAI Care Planning Management the facility failed to implement the care plan interventions for a newly develop pressure ulcer for one (1) Resident (R) (R9) out of nine (9) care plans reviewed. Findings include: Review of the policy titled RAI Care Planning Management, revised date of 8/2017. Standard: It is the practice of this facility to conduct a comprehensive, accurate, standardized, reproducible assessment of each resident's functional capacity. If modifications, deletions, or additions are necessary, changes should be made at the time of occurrence. Review of the admission Record for R9 revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and a diagnosis of, but not limited to, disorder of the skin and subcutaneous tissue and lymphedema. Review of the resident's most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) quarterly assessment dated [DATE] revealed that a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) was assessed as 15, which…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-25 · tag F0606 — failed to not employ staff found guilty of abuse — isolatedNot hire anyone with a finding of abuse, neglect, exploitation, or theft.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, staff interview, review of the facility policy titled Freedom Of Abuse Abuse Prevention Fast Alert the facility failed to ensure Georgia Criminal History Check System (GCHEXS) Fingerprint check was conducted for one (1) Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) of ten employee files selected for review. The facility census was eighty residents.Review of the policy titled Freedom of Abuse Abuse Prevention Fast Alert dated 1/2025. revealed Pre-Employment Screening: When a potential new employee is considered for hire, take the following steps to ensure the applicant is suitable for hire. 3. Criminal Background Checks are required; all employment candidates are required to authorize the facility to conduct a background check for conviction of crimes. The Human Resource Manager's job description was requested but not provided. During a record review of the employee files with the Human Resources Manager (HRM), there was no documentation that a fingerprint records check was conducted on CNA BB. An interview on 3/24/2026 at 2:15 p.m. with the HRM stated that she is…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-07-24 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interviews, record reviews, and review of the facility policies titled Management of Laundry and Infection Control Manual, the facility failed to ensure that laundry staff followed infection control processes while performing laundry services and failed to ensure the laundry room was maintained in a sanitary condition. In addition, the facility failed to ensure that Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) were followed for one of two residents with a gastrostomy tube (G-Tube) [a tube surgically inserted through the abdomen into the stomach used to deliver nutrition, fluids, and medications]. These deficient practices had the potential to place residents at risk of infections due to cross-contamination. The census was 73 residents. Findings include:Review of the facility policy titled, Management of Laundry, dated 1/2016, revealed the Description of Steps in the Laundry Process section included, Pck-up or Collection of Soiled Linen. B. Transferring Soiled Linen: . all soiled linen must be covered during transportation while being stored on unit or floors. A…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-07-24 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — patternDevelop 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 staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility policy titled, Infection Control Manual, the facility failed to ensure three of five sampled residents (R) (R1, R29, and R13) for vaccinations had a completed consent, declination and/or proof of education for the pneumococcal and/or influenza vaccine. This deficient practice had the potential to place R1, R29, and R13 at risk of unmet needs. Findings include:Review of the facility policy titled, Infection Control Manual, revised date 9/2023, revealed the Immunizations: Standing Orders, section included, . 3. Counsel resident and/or family/responsible party on the benefits and adverse effects of each vaccine prior to administration of the vaccines. 4. Complete the Pneumococcal and Influenza Vaccine-Information and Consent with the resident or family at the time of admission and each time offered. Place in the medical record.1. Review of the admission Record for R1 revealed admission on [DATE]. Review of the Immunization Record for R1 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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-24 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
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's policy titled Incontinence Management, the facility failed to ensure a urinary catheter privacy bag was provided for one of one resident (R) R2 with a urinary catheter. This failure had the potential to diminish the resident's quality of life.Findings include:Review of the facility's policies titled Incontinence Management dated January 2025 documented Other Options Catheterizations: Not Appropriate for Rehabilitation; If the resident is not appropriate for a Program, the care plan will identify other interventions to maintain skin integrity, prevent urinary tract infection and provide dignity for the resident.Review of the facility's Electronic Medical Records (EMR) revealed R2 was re-admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis that included but not limited to neuromuscular dysfunction of bladder and presence of urogenital implants.Review of the Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documented Section C (Cognition)…
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 · D2025-07-24 · 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, and review of the facility's policies titled Medication Administration, the facility failed to remove expired medications from one of four medication carts and failed to remove expired medication and medical supplies from one of two medication rooms. The facility's census was 73.Findings include:Review of the facility's policy titled Medication Administration dated January 2025 documented Medications are to be stored appropriately as per manufacturer instructions. All expired medications or medications to be destroyed are to be taken off the medication cart and properly destroyed by the Environmental Protection Pharmacy guidelines.1. Observation on 7/22/2025 at 5:10 pm during review of the 400 Hall medication cart revealed there was one bottle of melatonin 1 mg tablets with an expiration date of 3/2025.Interview on 7/22/2025 at 5:11 pm with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) BB, who confirmed the bottle of melatonin 1 mg tablets was expired and should not be on the medication cart. She stated that if the residents received this expired…
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 · D2025-07-24 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — isolatedMake sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
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 representative (RR) interview, and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide a sanitary and comfortable environment for one of 53 sampled residents (R) (R58). This deficient practice had the potential to place R58 at risk of living in an uncomfortable environment. Findings include:Review of the medical record for R58 revealed an admission date of 8/2/2023. Diagnoses included, but not limited to, cerebrovascular accident.Review of R58's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Section C (Cognitive Patterns) documented a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 6 (indicating severe cognitive impairment). Section GG (Functional Abilities and Goals) documented R58 required assistance with all ADLs. In a concurrent observation and interview on 7/21/2025 at 1:15 pm, observation R58 lying in bed watching television and eating lunch, with the RR at the bedside. In an interview, the RR stated the sewage smell in the resident's bathroom was an ongoing…
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 · F2024-02-25 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interviews, and review of facility policies titled Procedure for Washing Pots and Pans, and Proper Temperatures For Meal Preparation and Service, and review of the EcoLab Product Specification document for the Multi-Quat Sanitizer, the facility failed to demonstrate the proper usage of the three-compartment sink to sanitize dishware to prevent contamination, failed to allow dishware items to air dry, and failed to ensure all food items on the steam table were held above 135 degrees Fahrenheit (F) to prevent bacteria growth. These deficient practices had the potential to place residents consuming an oral diet at risk of contracting a foodborne illness. The facility census was 69 with 68 residents receiving an oral diet. Findings include: 1. A review of the undated facility policy titled Procedure for Washing Pots and Pans, revealed the Procedure section line 3: The third sink sanitizes the items by: a. Use of a chemical sanitizer added to water filling the sink with water; or b. Filling the sink with water kept at 180 degrees F and submerging the items…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-25 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
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, staff interview, record review, and review of facility policy titled Skin Management Standards, the facility failed to provide wound treatment per the physician's order and failed to wash/sanitize hands and change gloves during wound treatment for one resident (R) (R67) of three residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. This deficient practice had the potential to place R67 at risk for medical complications and infection. Findings include: A review of the undated facility policy titled Skin Management Standards, revealed the procedure for dressing change: 1. Check the doctors' orders for the type and frequency of dressing and any special instructions required for performing the procedure, including pre-medication for the resident's comfort. 6. Wash/ Sanitize hands, put on clean gloves, remove soiled dressing, and discard immediately in a plastic bag. 7. Remove gloves, and place them in a plastic bag. 8. Wash/ sanitize hands. 9. Put on a pair of clean gloves. 10. Clean the wound from the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2022-09-01 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and review of the facility's infection control policy titled, Pandemic Pathogen Plan (Coronavirus), and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines, the facility failed to ensure that all staff were wearing face masks appropriately when the COVID-19 county transmission level for the facility was high. This had the potential to affect all 67 residents in the facility. Findings included: A review of the facility's policy titled, Pandemic Pathogen Plan (Coronavirus), dated 03/2020, revealed in part the following: Person to person appears like other respiratory viruses, mainly due to respiratory droplets produced when an infected person coughs or sneezes. These droplet land in the mouths, nose and/or eyes of people who are nearby or possibly inhaled into their lungs. A review of the CDC COVID Data Tracker, indicated that at the time of the survey entrance, 08/29/2022, the facility was located in a county with high community transmission of COVID-19. A review of the CDC guidelines, Interim Infection Prevention and Control Recommendations…
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 before2022-09-01 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — patternDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, record review, and review of facility policy titled, RAI [Resident Assessment Instrument]/Care Planning Management, the facility failed to develop person-centered, comprehensive care plans for four (Resident [R] #13, R#35, R#57 and R#60) of 24 residents whose care plans were reviewed. Specifically, the facility: - Failed to develop a care plan that addressed behavioral management for R#13. - Failed to develop a care plan that addressed R#35's pressure ulcer care. - Failed to develop a care plan with resident-specific interventions addressing R#57's nutritional needs and tracheostomy care. - Failed to develop a care plan for R#60 that accurately addressed behavioral symptoms that were pertinent to the resident. Findings included: Review of a facility policy titled, RAI [Resident Assessment Instrument]/Care Planning Management, dated July 2022, revealed, Problems will be identified and written in an interdisciplinary CAA [Care Area Assessment] integrated format. A discharge plan…
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.
Show the remaining 7 citations
- Potential for harm · E2022-09-01 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — patternProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure staff followed physician orders regarding medication dosing and wound care frequency for three (Resident [R] #35, #51, and #65) of four sampled residents reviewed for physician orders. Findings included: A review of the facility's policy, titled, Physician Services indicated It is the standard of this facility that all medications and treatment protocols are ordered by the resident's attending physician or designee. Physician's orders include medications including strength, dosage, frequency, route of administration, supporting diagnosis and a stop date when appropriate. 1. A review of an admission Record revealed the facility admitted R#51 on 05/06/2022 with diagnoses of chronic pain, anxiety, and major depressive disorder. A review of a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 08/02/2022, revealed R#51 was cognitively intact as evidenced by a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15. Per the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-09-01 · tag F0552 — isolatedEnsure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
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, the facility failed to promote and facilitate resident self-determination for one (Resident [R] #51) of four sampled residents reviewed for pain management. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure nursing staff honored R#51's choice regarding acceptance or refusal of specific medications. Findings included: A review of the admission Record revealed R#51 had diagnoses including chronic pain, anxiety, spondylosis (arthritis affecting the neck), and spinal stenosis (narrowing or compressing of the nerves) in the neck area/upper back. Review of a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], revealed R#51 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating the resident was cognitively intact. The MDS indicated the resident received pain medications on an as-needed (PRN) basis and had frequent pain at an intensity level of 7 out of 10 (with zero being no pain and 10 being unbearable pain). According to the MDS, the resident received an opioid (narcotic pain…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-09-01 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, interviews, and facility policy titled Change of Condition/Incident Reporting, the facility failed to notify the responsible party (RP) of a resident's change of condition. The RP was not notified of a hospital transfer or notified when the resident returned from the hospital with a diagnosis of COVID-19. This affected one [Resident (R) #19] of one resident reviewed for notification of changes of condition. Findings included: Review of a policy dated August 2021 and titled Change of Condition/Incident Reporting indicated, If there is an actual change in condition, the resident's physician is notified promptly and validated as to information. Family/Responsible Party notified promptly. A review of an admission Record revealed the facility admitted R#19 with diagnoses which included acute respiratory failure, cerebral infarction, and other speech language deficits. A review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 07/04/2022, revealed R#19 had severe cognitive impairment as evidenced by a Staff Assessment for Mental Status (SAMS). Per the MDS, the resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-09-01 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — isolatedHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure prompt efforts were made to resolve residents' grievances and the results of those efforts were communicated to the resident for two (Resident [R] #51 and R#55) of five sampled residents reviewed for grievances related to missing personal property. Specifically, the facility: - Failed to ensure R#51's verbal complaint of missing clothing was documented as a grievance, efforts were promptly made to locate the clothing, and the resident was kept informed of efforts to resolve the grievance. - Failed to ensure R#55's grievance related to missing money was thoroughly investigated. Findings included: 1. Review of an admission Record revealed R#51 had diagnoses which included generalized anxiety disorder, essential hypertension, and spondylosis (arthritis affecting the neck). Review of a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed R#51 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 15, indicating the resident was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-09-01 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, record review, facility policy titled Freedom of Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation; Abuse Prevention: Fast Alerts, the facility failed to ensure staff immediately reported an allegation of staff-to-resident abuse to the Administrator for one (Resident [R] #13) of one sampled resident reviewed for abuse. The facility further failed to ensure the allegation of staff-to-resident abuse was reported to the State Survey Agency (SSA) for R#13. Findings included: Review of a facility policy titled, Freedom of Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation; Abuse Prevention: Fast Alerts, dated January 2022, revealed, Reporting/Investigation/Response Policy. Any complaint, allegation, observation or suspicion of resident abuse, mistreatment or neglect, whether physical, verbal, mental or sexual, involuntary, or voluntary, is to be communicated to the Abuse Coordinator, thoroughly reported, investigated, and documented in a uniform manner as detailed below. Reporting - All employees are required to immediately notify…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-09-01 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, record review, facility policy review, and review of an incident report and police report, it was determined the facility failed to investigate an allegation of staff-to-resident physical abuse for one (Resident [R] #13) of one sampled resident reviewed for abuse. Findings included: Review of a facility policy titled, Freedom of Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation; Abuse Prevention: Fast Alerts, dated January 2022, revealed, Investigation. All alleged violations involving mistreatment, sexual inappropriate behaviors, and abuse or neglect will be thoroughly investigated by the facility under the direction of the Administrator and in accordance with state and federal law. The policy listed the steps of the investigation included the following: - 2. Interview the resident or other resident witnesses. - 4. Interview the staff member implicated. Interviewer is to document the staff member's knowledge and/or version of the incident in a written narrative that is dated and signed. - 5. Interview all…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-09-01 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to change an indwelling urinary catheter at the frequency specified by the physician for one (Resident [R] #62) of three sampled residents reviewed for urinary catheters. Findings included: Review of an admission Record revealed the facility admitted R#62 on 06/24/2022 with diagnoses including stage 3 pressure ulcer to the sacrum and dementia without behavioral disturbance. Review of a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed R#62 was severely impaired in cognitive skills for daily decision-making per a staff assessment of mental status. The MDS indicated the resident had an indwelling urinary catheter. Review of the July 2022 Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed R#62 was to have a #17 French indwelling Foley urinary catheter with a 30-milliliter (mL) balloon, to be changed every 30 days and as needed, based on an order dated 07/22/2022. The MAR indicated the catheter was to be changed initially on 07/22/2022;…
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
No federal fines in the current CMS record. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.
- Medicare payment denial — starting 2026-04-24 for 1 days
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to BEACON HEALTH MANAGEMENT — 11 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 2 of 5 | 1.5 | +0.5 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 1 of 5 | 1.8 | -0.8 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 1.6 | -0.6 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 2.1 | +2.9 vs chain |
The other 10 homes this chain runs (chain average 1.5★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PWW HEALTHCARE, LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 09/01/2017 |
| HOLIDAY, ELISA | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 03/14/2022 |
| BEACON HEALTH MANAGEMENT LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 09/01/2017 |
| WERTHEIM, BRUCE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 09/01/2017 |
2 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 88% 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 $671K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in GA
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Georgia Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 115484. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-07-24, 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.