Comfort Creek Nursing And Rehabilitation Center

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

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.

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.

Met the expected recovery: 40.9% 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 22 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

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

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 98 beds and averages 69.2 residents a day — about 71% occupied, or roughly 29 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 2.84 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.21 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.94 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 2.67 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 2.90 on weekdays — 8% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.22 to 0.17 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 32% 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 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.

25 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 13 are one tap away and print in full.

• Immediate jeopardy · J2024-06-07 · tag F0678 — failed to provide CPR when needed — isolated
  Provide basic life support, including CPR, prior to the arrival of emergency medical personnel , subject to physician orders and the resident’s advance directives.
  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 reviews, and a review of the facility's policy titled Emergency Response Management Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR), the facility failed to activate 911 and continue CPR until more aggressive life-sustaining treatment could be initiated for one resident (R1) of 14 residents reviewed for code status. On [DATE], a determination was made that a situation in which the facility's noncompliance with one or more requirements of participation had caused or had the likelihood to cause, serious injury, harm, impairment, or death to residents. The facility's Administrator and the Director of Nursing (DON) were informed of the Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) on [DATE] at 10:14 am. The noncompliance related to the Immediate Jeopardy was identified to have existed on [DATE]. An Acceptable Removal Plan was received on [DATE]. Based on observation, record reviews, review of facility policies as outlined in the Removal Plan, and staff interviews, it was validated that the corrective plans and the…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Immediate jeopardy · J2024-06-07 · tag F0835 — failed to run the facility competently — isolated
  Administer the facility in a manner that enables it to use its resources effectively and efficiently.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interviews, record review, and a review of the Administrator and Director of Nursing (DON) Job Description, the Administration failed to ensure that staff were following appropriate procedure when providing Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) for one resident (R1) of 14 residents reviewed for code status. On [DATE], a determination was made that a situation in which the facility's noncompliance with one or more requirements of participation had caused or had the likelihood to cause, serious injury, harm, impairment, or death to residents. The facility's Administrator and DON were informed of the Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) on [DATE] at 10:14 a.m. The noncompliance related to the IJ was identified to have existed on [DATE]. An Acceptable Removal Plan was received on [DATE]. Based on observation, record reviews, review of facility policies as outlined in the Removal Plan, and staff interviews, it was validated that the corrective plans and the immediacy of the deficient practice was removed on [DATE].…

  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.

  Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2026-04-30 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure the kitchen's large manual can opener blade and its base, microwave oven, and food preparation pots and pans were clean and/or dry when stored and failed to cover and/or date opened food stored in one of one facility kitchen. The facility also failed to ensure an opened container of thickened apple juice was dated when opened, and discard when its best if used by date had expired in one of two nursing unit resident refrigerators. These failures had the potential to create an environment for food-borne illnesses which could affect 67 residents who consumed food prepared from the facility's kitchen. Findings include: 1. Observation during the initial kitchen inspection on 04/27/2026 from 11:00 AM to 11:40 AM, with the Dietary Manager (DM) present, revealed the following unclean food preparation and service equipment: a. The kitchen's large manual can opener was unclean with accumulated dried and sticky substances on its blade and table base attachment. b. A large stock pot, that was stored 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.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2026-04-30 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — pattern
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to determine a root cause for two of two residents (R) R1 from eloping from the facility on two separate occasions and R22 wandering into other residents room. The facility's failure to determine a root cause in R1 exiting the facility and R22 entering other resodents room increases the risk of accidents or injury. Findings include: 1. Review of the admission Record found under the Profile tab of the electronic medical record (EMR) revealed R1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Alzheimer's Disease, auditory hallucinations, and anxiety. Review of the Elopement Evaluation found under the Assessments tab of the EMR, , dated 01/14/2025 revealed R1 has a history of wandering, wandering aimlessly, and identified R1 as an elopement risk. Review of the High Risk Event-Chart Audit documents, provided by the facility, revealed R1 eloped from the facility on 01/22/2026. Interventions added to prevent additional elopements…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-04-30 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
  Honor 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, interviews, record reviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to respect resident rights when they failed to provide Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) care of their choice for two out of two dependent residents (Resident (R) R15 and R16) reviewed for ADLs assistance out of a total of 24 sampled residents. This failure had the potential to adversely affect residents' dignity, comfort, and quality of life.Findings Include: 1. Review of the facility's policy titled Resident Hygiene, dated January 2025, revealed that residents were to be bathed as needed, to include a sponge bath and/or bed bath, or more often, including a shower at least twice weekly. Review of R15's admission Record, located in the Electronic Medical Record (EMR) under the Profile tab. indicated the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including, but not limited to stiff person syndrome (SPS). Review of R15's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-04-30 · tag F0554 — isolated
  Allow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
  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 drugs and biologicals were stored in a secure manner for one of one resident (Resident (R)16) out of a sample size of 24. Specifically, medications requiring licensed nursing administration were stored unsecured and accessible in the resident's room, despite the resident not self administering medications. This failure placed the residents at risk for unauthorized access, misuse, and improper medication management. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Medication Administration, dated 01/2025, indicated that residents may self administer medications only after an assessment had been completed. The policy further indicated licensed nursing staff are responsible for maintaining medications in a secure area and ensuring safe medication management. Review of R16's admission Record located in the Electronic Medical Records (EMR) under the Profile tab revealed the resident was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-30 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to provide a safe and clean environment for residents in the dining room. The facility's failure to maintain dining room chairs with cleanable surfaces without tears in the seating of the chairs has the potential to affect residents who sit in the dining room. An observation of the eating at the dining room tables on 04/27/2026 at 12:15 PM revealed five dining room chairs with tears in the seats. An interview on 04/27/2026 at 11:45 AM with the Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed the five dining room chairs with tears in the seat with the exposed non-cleanable material. The DON confirmed the chairs must be cleanable and the tears in the seats render the seat uncleanable. .

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-04-30 · tag F0641 — isolated
  Ensure 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 observation, interview, record review, and review of Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) manual the facility failed to ensure an accurate Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment was submitted for the usage of side rails for one of one resident (R) R5 reviewed for physical restraints out of a total sample of 28. The failure to code the MDS correctly could potentially lead to inaccurate federal reimbursements, inaccurate resident care planning, and improper use of physical restraints. Findings Include: Review of R5's admission Record, located under the Profile tab of the electronic medical record (EMR), indicated R5 was admitted on to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease and cognitive communication deficit. Review of R5's quarterly MDS, with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 03/19/2026 and located under the MDS tab of the electronic medical record (EMR), revealed the assessment specified the resident used side rails daily and had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-04-30 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of out one wandering resident's (R) R22 care plan and updated with appropriate interventions. (Cross Reference F689) Findings include: Review of the Face Sheet located in the Profile tab of the electronic medical record (EMR) revealed R22 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with dementia, adjustment disorder with disturbance of conduct, and altered mental status. Review of R22's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 03/19/2026, located in the EMR under the MDS tab, revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 99 out of 15, which indicated R22's cognitive function was severely impaired. Review of R22's Care Plan, dated 04/072026, located under the Care Plan tab of the EMR, revealed that R22 was at risk for wandering/elopement related to exit seeking behaviors, in place of an intervention to check R22's location regularly during and between rounds during waking hours. The care plan did not…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-04-30 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolated
  Provide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
  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 interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure communication sheets were completed for one of one resident (R) R8 reviewed for dialysis out of a total sample of 28 residents. This failure had the potential to affect the current facility census of 70 residents. Review of the Face Sheet located in the Profile tab of the electronic medical record (EMR) revealed R8 was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] with end stage renal disease, Review of R8's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 02/04/2026, located in the EMR under the MDS tab, revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of six out of 15, which indicated R8's cognitive function was severely impaired. Review of R8's Care Plan, located under the Care Plan tab of the EMR, on page 37 of 46 revealed that R8 required hemodialysis related to renal failure, in place are interventions that included, resident to be provided with lunch in proper storage container…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-04-30 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
  Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation interviews and review of the manufactures instructions for use, the facility failed to follow the manufacturer's instructions for the administration of insulin to one resident of one resident, (R) R55, identified by the facility as having orders for insulin administration by an insulin pen. The facility's failure to follow the manufacturer's guidelines placed residents who received insulin from an insulin pen at risk to receive an incorrect dose. Findings include: Observation on 04/29/2026 at 4:30 PM revealed Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 4 performed a blood glucose test for sliding scale insulin administration. After blood glucose monitoring, R55 required 10 units of NovoLog insulin. LPN 4 obtained a NovoLog insulin pen, verified the orders, set the dose to be administered to R55 as 10 units, and prepared to administer the insulin. Upon discussion with LPN4, she confirmed she had not primed the disposable needle attached to the insulin pen. LPN 4 stated she had never been told how to prime the pen. Interview with the Administrator/Director Of Nursing on…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-08 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
  Immediately 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on family and staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility policy titled, Discharge Plan/Transfers and policy titled, Instructions for Conduction BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status), the facility failed to notify the responsible party of the discharge and transfer to a Personal Care Home for one out of eight sampled residents (R) with moderate cognitive impairment. Findings included:Review of the facility's policy titled Discharge Plan/Transfers, with a revised date of 10/20/2025, revealed under the Procedure section: 3. When the facility anticipates a resident's discharge to a private residence or to another nursing care facility, a post-discharge plan will be developed which will help the resident adjust to their new living environment. 4. The post discharge plan will be developed by the care team with the assistance of the resident and his/her family. 6. As a minimum the post discharge plan will include: a. A description of the residents's and family's preference of care. d. 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

Fines & penalties

$15,880 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $15,880 — penalty dated 2024-06-07

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 →

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 5 rows in the source record cover these 4 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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 71% 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 $475K 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