Complete Care at Corsica Hills LLC
205 Armstrong Street, Centreville, MD 21617 · For profit - Individual · 120 certified beds · (410) 758-2323 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Jul 2024
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0605, F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0565)
- inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
- a high number of inspection citations overall (36) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $55,564 in federal fines (most recent 2024-07-12)
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 | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 3 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 fell from 4 to 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
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 | 17.1% | 20.4% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 5.7% | 5.4% | 5.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 1.3% | 0.5% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 3.9% | 1.5% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 29.0% | 22.8% | 6.5% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 3.1% | 2.4% | 3.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 23.0% | 22.2% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 20.2% | 16.7% | 18.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 96.6% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 7.7% | 5.9% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 26.1% | 25.0% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 7.3% | 13.8% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 2.1% | 1.1% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 92.2% | 80.6% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 18.1% | 21.0% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 11.7% | 9.8% | 12.0% | typical |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 0.82 | 1.33 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.47 | 1.20 | 1.80 | better |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ 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.
61.9% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 261 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 71.4% 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 28 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 0.39 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 67% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 20% 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 | 61.9%CMS range 56.8–66.5 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 12.9%CMS range 9.8–16.0 | 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 | 71.4% | 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 | 78.6% | 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 | 64.3% | 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 | 98.6% | 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 | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 98.8% | 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 | 2.1% | 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 | 5.7% | 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 | 8.3%CMS range 5.5–11.7 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.20 | 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 120 beds and averages 111.0 residents a day — about 92% occupied, or roughly 9 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.59 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.86 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.23 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.33 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.70 on weekdays — 10% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.97 to 0.60 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 52% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
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.
36 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 25 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · K2024-07-12 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — patternProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review and interview, and facility policy review, the facility staff failed to recognize abuse and take action to prevent abuse to residents (Resident #921, #919, #77, #905, #912, #916, #927, #2, #17, #66, #303) reviewed for abuse for 11 out of a total sample of 21 residents. These actions resulted in the finding of an Immediate Jeopardy which was identified on 7/10/24 at 4:30 PM. An IJ summary tool was provided to the facility on 7/10/24 at 4:48 PM. The facility submitted a draft of their plan to remove the immediacy on 7/10/24 at 6:30 PM and it was not accepted. The facility submitted a 2nd draft of their plan to remove the immediacy on 7/10/24 at 7:36 PM and it was not accepted. The facility submitted a 3rd plan on 7/10/24 at 8:30 PM and it was accepted by the state agency at 8:40 PM. After removal of the immediacy, the deficient practice remained with a scope and severity of H. The Immediate Jeopardy was removed on 7/12/24 at 9:30 AM after on-site confirmation of the completion of 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 · E2026-01-12 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide a clean and homelike environment. This was evident in 1 (C) of 2 shower rooms, 6 (14, 24, 52, 54, 55, and 57) out of 12 resident rooms, and the C/D Nourishment Room observed during the recertification survey. The findings include: On 01/05/26 at 12:28 PM, the surveyors observed brown staining on the ceiling in room [ROOM NUMBER]. On 01/07/26 at 9:53 AM, the surveyors observed a dusty wall mounted ventilation unit, peeling bed board, indentation in the wall, and peeling paint at the base of the bathroom wall in room [ROOM NUMBER]. On 01/07/26 at 9:57 AM, the surveyors observed brown staining around the wall mounted ventilation unit in room [ROOM NUMBER] and room [ROOM NUMBER]. On 01/07/26 at 10:10 AM, the surveyors observed the C/D Nourishment Room. The refrigerator contained crumbs and brown and red stains. The room's floor also had trash, with black and brown staining visible on the tiles. On 01/07/2026 at 11:37 AM, 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 · Ecited before2026-01-12 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure 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 kitchen observation, record review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that food storage complied with professional standards of food safety. This practice had the potential to impact all residents eating food prepared in the kitchen. The findings include: During the initial brief tour of the kitchen on 01/05/26 at 8:15 AM, the surveyors observed hard boiled eggs, salad, an opened carton of liquid eggs, opened dry pasta, and multiple Rita's Italian ices that were not labeled and dated. The surveyors also observed an uncovered container of rice. The dietary manager acknowledged that food should be labeled and dated once opened and the rice should be covered. On 01/10/26 at 10:11 AM, the surveyors observed the A/B and C/D Nourishment Rooms. The A/B Nourishment Room fridge had a green bag, 1 salad dressing bottle, and two bottles of thickened hydrolyte water that were not labeled and dated. The C/D Nourishment Room fridge had sticky colored residue in it. The Nursing Home Administrator acknowledged the concerns and arranged for 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 · E2026-01-12 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — patternMake 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
Based on observation and interview, it was determined that the facility failed to provide a functional and sanitary environment. This was evident for 1 (C) out of 4 shower rooms observed during the recertification survey.On 01/07/2026 at 9:35 AM, the surveyors observed two drains covered in multicolored hair and a metal panel coming off of the bathroom wall. Unit Manager #10 and the Maintenance Regional Director acknowledged the concerns and stated the shower rooms are scheduled for renovation. On 01/07/2026 at 10:11 AM, the surveyors observed a dirty and stained floor with trash in the C/D Nourishment Room.On 01/07/2026 at 11:37 AM, The Nursing Home Administrator (NHA), Maintenance Regional Director, and Maintenance Supervisor acknowledged the concerns in the C/D Nourishment Room. On 01/08/2026 at 11:26 AM, the surveyors observed the ice machine dripping and black staining around the drain in the A/B Nourishment Room. On 01/09/2026 at 10:22 AM, surveyors showed the concerns in the A/B Nourishment Room to the NHA. The NHA stated that they would call for repair immediately.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.
- Potential for harm · E2026-01-12 · tag F0923 — patternHave enough outside ventilation via a window or mechanical ventilation, or both.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Number of residents sampled: Number of residents cited: Based on observations and interviews with facility staff, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain clean and operational ventilation systems, thereby impairing proper airflow throughout the premises. This deficiency was observed in 4 of the 5 unit ventilation systems reviewed during the annual survey.The findings include: Local Exhaust Ventilation ([NAME]) systems are designed and engineered to capture and remove contaminants such as excessive heat, steam, condensation, vapor, smoke, odor, and fumes. This is achieved through the calibration of the total pressure, which is calculated as the sum of the static pressure exiting and entering the system, minus the velocity pressure entering the system. In addition, the fan speed, pressure, and power must be adjusted to account for the specific gravity of the contaminant being captured and removed by the [NAME] system, while considering the specific size and air changes of the room. On 01/5/2026 at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-12 · tag F0551 — isolatedGive the resident's representative the ability to exercise the resident's rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Number of residents sampled:Number of residents cited:Based on record review and interview it was determined that the facility failed to provide a Resident's Representative the right to be involved in informed consent process. This was found evident in 1 (Resident #16) of 4 residents reviewed for advanced directives. The findings include: On 1/6/26 at 12:23 PM, the surveyor reviewed Resident #16's medical record. The review revealed a Medical Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (MOLST) dated 9/10/24 indicated Resident #16's MOLST decisions were done per the legal authority in accordance with all provisions of the Health Care Decision Act. On further review it was noted that on 11/11/25 and 11/14/25 two medical providers completed assessment/certifications related to medical condition decision-making and treatment limitations. Both providers determined that Resident #16 lacked capacity to make their own decisions and those related to medical necessity/prognosis. Next the surveyor reviewed the social service assessment completed on 11/12/25 by Social Worker #25. The assessment…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-12 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — isolatedPrevent the use of unnecessary psychotropic medications or use medications that may restrain a resident's ability to function.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to attempt a recommended gradual dose reduction for a psychotropic medication and/or failed to document contraindication rationale for why gradual dose reduction was not attempted. This was found evident in 1 (Resident #30) out of 6 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The findings include: Psychotropic medications are used to treat mental health disorders and are considered any drug that affects behavior, mood, thoughts, or perception. There are five main types of psychotropic medications, and each type has its own specific uses, benefits, and side effects. The five main types are: antidepressants, anti-anxiety, stimulants, antipsychotics and mood stabilizers. Mirtazapine, also known as Remeron, is used to treat depression. Mirtazapine belongs to a group of medicines called tetracyclic antidepressants and is considered a psychotropic medication. A common side effect is increased appetite. Gradual Dose Reduction (GDR) refers to the stepwise tapering of a dose to determine if symptoms,…
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 · D2026-01-12 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, and interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to accurately document a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment in a Resident's medical record. This was found evident of 1 (Resident #5) of 33 residents reviewed in the survey. The findings include: On 1/6/26 at 9:15 AM, the surveyor interviewed Resident #5. During the interview Resident #5 stated that he/she had not had any teeth since being admitted to the facility. On 1/8/26 at 9:44 AM, the surveyor reviewed Resident #5's most recent comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE]. In the oral dental assessment, there was a list that gave options to capture an abnormal evaluation. One option was, no natural teeth or tooth fragment(s) (edentulous) but this option was left blank. Resident #5 was coded as none of the above were present. Next, the surveyor reviewed Resident #5's care plan. A care plan initiated on 5/17/17 stated, Resident #5 is at risk for oral health or dental care problems as evidenced by: resident 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 · Dcited before2026-01-12 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Number of residents sampled:Number of residents cited:Based on observation, interviews, and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to review and revise a Resident's care plan after a Resident's situation changed. This was found evident of 1 (Resident #9) out of 1 Residents reviewed for hearing and vision during the survey. The findings include: Care plans are developed for residents to guide the care that residents receive in the facility. They are required to be developed within 7 days of completion of a resident's admission comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment and revised at least every quarter (or more often as needed). The facility is required to have care plans developed and revised by an interdisciplinary team. On 1/6/26 at 7:03 AM, the surveyor observed Resident #9 in his/her bedroom watching the television at a loud volume. The surveyor noted that Resident #9 did not have hearing aids at the time. On 1/8/26 at 9:45 AM, the surveyor reviewed resident #9's orders. Resident #9 had an order written on 9/18/25 that stated, continue use of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-12 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, record reviews, and interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to provide necessary services to maintain good personal hygiene for dependent residents. This was evident in 2 (Resident #66 and Resident #93) of 2 Residents reviewed for Activity of Daily Living (ADL) care during the annual survey.The findings include:1) On 1/12/2026 at 11:00 AM, the surveyor observed Resident #66 seated on the side of the bed, wearing wrist support braces on both hands. All 10 fingers appeared clean; however, the free edge of the fingernails was about 0.5 cm in length.The surveyor inquired of Resident #66 whether nail trimming was needed. The Resident said that the free edge of the nails was preferred to be shorter.At 11:30 AM, the surveyor informed Staff #19 of Resident #66's request for nail care.A review of the Resident's Minimum Data Set (MDS) and Care Plan dated 6/24/2024, indicated that the resident was dependent (requiring the helper to perform all effort) on ADL cares to maintain good personal hygiene. In addition, the BATHING/SHOWERING intervention notes…
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 · D2026-01-12 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interviews, facility policy review, and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to provide respiratory care consistent with professional standards for oxygen administration. This was found evident of 1 (Resident #1) out of 2 residents reviewed for respiratory care during the survey. Pulse oximeter - a device that uses a light source to analyze the light that passes through a finger and can determine the percentage of oxygen in the red blood cells, referred to as a pulse ox (pox) Peripheral Oxygen Saturation (SPO2). Nasal cannula- a medical device used to provide supplemental oxygen therapy to people who have lower oxygen levels. The findings include: On 1/6/26 at 7:14 AM, the surveyor observed Resident #1 with an oxygen concentrator in his/her room, however the Resident was currently not receiving oxygen. Resident #1 stated that he/she had just gotten over pneumonia. On 1/7/26 at 11:11 AM, the surveyor reviewed Resident #1's orders. An order was written on 12/23/25 for oxygen 2 liters/minute via Nasal Cannula (NC) for SPO2 less than 92% every…
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 25 citations
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-12 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interviews, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain medical records in accordance with acceptable professional standards and practices by keeping complete documentation. This was found evident in 2 (Resident #1 and #7) out of 33 residents reviewed during the survey. The findings include:1) On 1/7/26 at 7:12 AM, the surveyor conducted an interview with Resident #1. During the interview the Resident stated that on occasion scheduled showers have not been given. On 1/7/26 at 11:31 AM, the surveyor requested shower documentation for Resident #1 from December of 2025 and January 2026. Next the surveyor reviewed the documentation. The surveyor noted that on Resident #1's scheduled shower days of 12/4/25, 12/8/25 and 12/11/25 the documentation was left blank. On 1/8/26 at 10:15 AM, the surveyor conducted an interview with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA). During the interview the NHA stated that she had reached out to the 2 staff responsible for giving showers to Resident #1 on the days that there was no documentation. She stated the on 12/4/25…
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 · D2026-01-12 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain a sanitary environment in resident shared areas and the laundry room. This was evident in 2 (C, D) out of 4 shower rooms and the laundry room observed during the recertification survey.The findings include:On 01/07/2026 at 9:30 AM, the surveyors observed soiled linen on shower room D's floor. GNA #9 entered the shower room and picked up the linen from the floor saying I came in to make sure the shower was clean. GNA #9 stated that they did not know why there was soiled linen on the floor because the facility expects staff to place soiled linen in the hamper. The surveyors also observed a brown substance on the floor of a shower stall next to a brown-stained commode chair.On 01/07/2026 at 9:45 AM, Unit Manager #10 observed the findings in the shower stall and stated she would have the area cleaned.The Nursing Home Administration (NHA), Maintenance Regional Director, and Maintenance Supervisor acknowledged the concerns on 01/07/2026 at 11:37 AM. On 01/12/2026 at 11:26 AM, the surveyors observed…
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 · F2024-07-12 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — widespreadSet up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interviews, review of the facility documentation, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure policies and procedures were implemented to address the facility's Quality Assessment and Performance Improvement (QAPI) plan and program, in which data was gathered, analyzed, developed, implemented, and re-evaluated to address adverse events related to potential deficient practice of abuse. This had the potential to affect all 105 residents residing in the facility at the time of the survey. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, [Facility Name] Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI), dated 2020, indicated .To provide continuous evaluation of [Name of facility] systems with the objectives of keeping systems functioning satisfactorily, preventing points of accountability for ensuring quality of care and quality of life . A request was made for any Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) regarding the prevention of abuse from 01/01/22 to 07/11/24. The facility provided documents from 09/19/22, which indicated the facility had an…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-07-12 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — patternHonor 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
Based on interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure that grievances were promptly resolved and ensure all written grievance decisions included the date of the grievance, a summary of the resident's grievance, a summary of the findings, a statement as to whether the grievance was confirmed or not confirmed, corrective action taken as a result of the grievance, and the date the decision was issued. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure grievances voiced by residents during resident council were documented, investigated, resolved, and followed up on by the facility of 105 residents. This failure had the potential to cause further grievances to be unresolved for residents throughout the facility. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Resident Council Meetings, dated 04/25/23 and provided by the facility, revealed The facility shall act upon concerns and recommendations of the Council, make attempts to accommodate recommendations to the extent practicable, and communicate its decision to the Council. Review of 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 · D2024-07-12 · 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 2) Review of R303's Face Sheet, located in the electronic medical record (EMR) under the Profile tab, revealed R303 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of a rib fracture and adjustment disorder with anxiety. Review of R303's admission MDS with an ARD of 06/24/24 located in the EMR under the MDS tab, revealed R303 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 out of 15, which indicated the resident was cognitively intact. Per the MDS, the resident did not exhibit any behavior during the assessment period. During an interview on 07/08/24 at 11:50 PM, R303 stated sometimes at night she was told by staff to go to the bathroom in her brief. She stated it felt awful and she did not like doing it. She stated sometimes she also had a bowel movement in her brief which felt very uncomfortable. She stated she would wiggle in the chair. She stated last night she was told this by a GNA who provided care. R303 stated she reported this to GNA148 this morning. During an interview on 07/11/24 at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-07-12 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interviews, record review, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to revise the care plan to include recommendations from the dental consult on 05/11/24 for one of 21 sample residents (Resident (R) 73) reviewed for care plan revision. This failure caused staff to be unaware of recommendations from the dentist or possible tooth pain for R73. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Care Planning - Comprehensive Person-Centered, dated 10/19, revealed A comprehensive, person-centered care plan that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet the resident's physical, psychosocial and functional needs is developed and implemented for each resident .The comprehensive, person-centered care plan will: . Describe services that would otherwise be provided . but are not provided due to the resident exercising his or her rights, including the right to refuse treatment . Review of R73's Face Sheet located in the electronic medical record (EMR) under the Profile tab, revealed an admission date of 07/27/22 with medical diagnoses that included…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-07-12 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — patternRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview it was determined that the facility failed to have a process in place to ensure the resident's safety directly following an allegation of abuse and to conduct a thorough investigation of the allegation. Evident for 3 (#913, #921 and #928) and Evident for 4 (#905, #911, #919 and #924) of 26 residents reviewed for abuse allegations during a recertification and complaint survey. The findings include: 1) A review of the facility's investigation file for the self-reported incident #MD00203605 on 7/10/24 at 7:15 PM revealed witness statements written by Geriatric Nursing Assistant (GNA) #130 and GNA #23 that read they had witnessed Registered Nurse #152 cursing and hitting Resident #921 on 3/14/24 at approximately 6:00 AM. However, the abuse was not reported to the Director of Nursing (DON) until 7:23 AM that morning. Therefore, RN #152 continued to have access to vulnerable residents for 1 hour and 23 minutes after she abused Resident #921. An interview with the DON on 7/11/24 at 1:11 PM revealed she was aware of the delayed reporting and offered no…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-07-12 · 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
Based on record review and interview it was determined that the facility staff failed to allow a resident the right to have a dignified existence by failing to be listening to the Resident during his/her care (Resident #911). This was evident for 1 of 73 residents reviewed during a complaint and recertification survey. The findings include: A review of the facility reported incident #MD00187781 on 7/10/24 at 10:30 AM revealed Resident #911 had reported an allegation of abuse on 1/14/23, because the GNA #148 turned me, and I yelled out in pain and asked her to stop and the GNA #148 continued working. An interview by the Director of Nursing on 1/14/23 revealed that Resident #911 felt that the GNA was not listening to me I instructed her how I like my care done and she would not listen. On 1/14/23 The roommate, Resident #929 called the manager to report that GNA #148 was mistreating my roommate, and he/she was not listening to him/her during his/her care. Resident #911 was no longer at the facility for an interview. On 7/10/24 at 12:30 PM, an interview with roommate Resident #929…
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 · D2024-07-12 · tag F0565 — failed to support the resident council — isolatedHonor the resident's right to organize and participate in resident/family groups in the facility.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that residents and/or resident representatives were afforded the right to file a grievance and receive a response regarding the action taken by the facility (Resident #906). This was evident for 1 of 3 residents reviewed during a recertification and complaint survey. The findings include: The MDS (Minimum Data Set) is a complete assessment of the resident which provides the facility information necessary to develop a plan of care, provide the appropriate care and services to the resident, and to modify the care plan based on the resident's status. A review of the complaint #MD00186681 on 7/8/24 at 10:15 AM revealed that there were care concerns regarding Resident #908. The concerns included but were not limited to a nurse dispensing medications to four people at one time, staffing on the memory care unit was not consistent, the resident not being changed, wearing dirty clothing, and having body odor. An interview with the complainant on 7/8/24 at 10:31 AM revealed that the complainant had…
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 · D2024-07-12 · 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
Based on medical record review and interview with facility staff, it was determined that the facility failed to review and implement a care plan when there were noted changes in condition requiring further facility services and follow-up (Resident #905). This was evident for 1 of 73 residents reviewed during a complaint and recertification survey. A care plan is a comprehensive and personalized document that outlines the specific needs, goals, and preferences of a patient. Care plans also address the specific services needed to attain and maintain a resident's highest practicable well-being through focus, goals and interventions. The findings include: Review of the electronic health record for Resident # 905 on 7/11/24 at 2:00 PM failed to reveal updated care plans related to 2 allegations of abuse occurring on 11/6/22 and on 11/9/22 respectively involving Resident #905. Resident #905's care plans in place were noted to address depression and cognitive decline, however, nothing related to having been exposed to 2 incidents of abuse 4 days apart. This concern was reviewed with 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 · Dcited before2024-07-12 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview it was determined that facility staff failed to provide activities of daily living (ADLs: bathing, personal hygiene, toileting, getting in and out of bed) for a resident who was dependent on them for care (Resident #906). This was evident for 1 (MD00186681) of 11 complaints reviewed during a recertification and complaint survey. The findings include: The MDS (Minimum Data Set) is a complete assessment of the resident which provides the facility information necessary to develop a plan of care, provide the appropriate care and services to the resident, and to modify the care plan based on the resident's status. A care plan is a guide that addresses the unique needs of each resident. It is used to plan, assess, and evaluate the effectiveness of the resident's care. A medical record review for Resident #906 on 7/12/24 at 8:32 AM revealed the attending physicians' progress note for a visit on 11/29/22 that read the resident had Alzheimer's dementia with anxiety. Review of an MDS (minimum data set) with an assessment reference date of 12/9/24 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 · D2024-07-12 · tag F0744 — failed to care for residents with dementia — isolatedProvide the appropriate treatment and services to a resident who displays or is diagnosed with dementia.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, medical record review and interview it was determined that the facility failed to 1) complete an admission nursing assessment thoroughly and therefore implement the correct interventions for a resident with known dementia history (Resident #917) This was evident for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for elopement and 2) ensure that residents residing on their dementia care unit had activities to help them achieve their highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. This was evident for 1 (#906) of 4 residents reviewed for dementia care. The findings include: 1) Review of the medical record for Resident # 917 on 7/9/24 at 12:08 PM revealed admission to the facility the end of November 2023, post hospitalization for change in vital signs, dementia and Alzheimer's behaviors including a recent hip fracture with continued falls. Review at this time of a facility incident report completed on 12/10/23 revealed that Resident #917 was able to exit the facility out a side door of the rehabilitation unit alone. According to the facility report a geriatric…
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 · E2019-05-24 · tag F0730 — patternObserve each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on reviews of administrative records and staff interview, it was determined that the nursing administrative staff failed to 1) conduct a yearly performance review on the entire geriatric nursing assistant staff for the year of 2018, and 2) ensure that all geriatric nursing assistant (GNA) staff completed a minimum of 12 hours of education per year. The findings include: 1) In an interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 05/23/19 at 11:34 AM, the facility DON stated that none of the geriatric nursing assistant staff received a performance evaluation for 2018. 2) On 05/24/19, a review of 6 random geriatric nursing assistant (GNA) staff members, educational records for 2018, revealed that 2/5 GNA's (staff member #14 and #15) failed to complete at a minimum of 12 hours of education for the year of 2018.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2019-05-24 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure 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 and interviews of facility staff, it was determined that food service employees failed to ensure that sanitary and safe food handling practices were followed to reduce the risk of foodborne illness. This deficient practice has the potential to affect all residents. The findings include: On 5/20/19 at 9:35 AM an initial tour of the facility's food storage, kitchen and dining room was conducted with the Foodservice Manager in Training (Staff #13) and the following observations were made: 1. The kitchen hand washing sink adjacent to the fume hood and 3 compartment sink was not operational. 2. The hand washing sink in the dishwasher room had no paper towels and the nozzle from a water hose was laying in the sink. 3. The dishwashing machine was soiled with a thick, visible layer of dust, food crumbs and debris. The exhaust fan for the dish room was caked with dust and is placed directly overtop the conveyor where the clean dishes exit the machine to be collected and dried. Dust was observed on walls and shelving above the dish line. 4. Unused plastic bins, scattered…
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 before2019-05-24 · 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
Based on dining observation and interview, it was determined the facility staff failed to provide residents with the most dignified existence with dining. This was evident for 2 (Resident #49 and #4) of 12 residents observed for dignity during an annual recertification survey. The findings include: 1A) The facility staff failed to provide Resident #49 with the most dignified existence with dining. Surveyor observation of breakfast on 5/21/19 at 9:40 AM revealed the resident in the dining room on the long-term care unit revealed Resident #49 being fed by facility staff #18; however, the facility staff was standing to feed Resident #49. Sitting is the most dignified way to feed a resident. 1B) The facility staff failed to provide Resident #49 with the most dignified existence with dining. Surveyor observation of breakfast on 5/24/19 at 9:35 AM revealed Residents #81 and #49 positioned at the same table in a small dining room on the long-term unit. It was noted at that time, Resident #81 was eating and the food tray for Resident #49 was on the table and not being addressed. It 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 · D2019-05-24 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility staff failed to ensure that call bells were within reach for Resident (#47 and #68). This was evident for 2 of 53 residents selected for review during the annual recertification survey. The findings include: 1) A call bell is a bedside button tethered to the wall in the resident's room, which directs signals to the nursing station; a call light usually indicates that the patient has a need or perceived need requiring attention from the nurse or geriatric nursing assistant on duty. There is a call light for each resident in the room, for each bed. Surveyor observation of Resident #47 on 5/23/19 at 11:00 AM and 12:10 PM revealed the resident out of bed in the wheelchair. The resident was placed in the middle of the room between the 2 beds in the room. Further observation revealed the facility staff failed to provide Resident #47 with the call light within reach. It was noted the call light delegated for Resident #47 could not be detected and the other call light- delegated for the other resident was noted to be in the middle of the bed…
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 · D2019-05-24 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolatedHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on medical record review and interview it was determined the facility staff failed to provide showers to Resident (#71). This was evident for 1 of 2 resident reviewed for choices during the annual survey process and 1 of 53 residents selected for review. The findings include: Medical record review for Resident #71 revealed the resident was to have showers on Monday and Thursday 7-3 shift. Interview with Resident #71 on 5/20/19 at 2:00 PM revealed the resident stating that he/she did not receive showers. Record review revealed the facility staff failed to document showers for the resident on 5/9/19 and 5/20/19. Interview with the Director of Nursing on 5/23/19 at 10:00 AM confirmed the facility staff failed to provide showers to Resident #71 as ordered.
- Potential for harm · D2019-05-24 · 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 medical record review and interview, it was determined the facility staff failed to 1) notify the physician of a finger stick above 400 as ordered by the physician for Resident (#47), 2) notify the physician of a delay in obtaining a stat x-ray for Resident (#71) and 3) notify a resident's physician and the facility nutritionist when a resident was identified with a significant weight loss for Resident #26. This was evident for 3 of 53 residents selected for review during the annual survey process. The findings include: 1) The facility staff failed to notify the physician of a finger stick above 400 as ordered. Medical record review for Resident #47 revealed on 11/30/18 the physician ordered: FS, notify physician if results are above 400 or below 70. Finger stick (FS) is a procedure in which a finger is pricked with a lancet to obtain a small quantity of capillary blood for testing of blood sugar. Blood sugar testing requires the use of a small electronic device called a glucometer. The meter reads the amount of sugar in a small sample of blood, usually from your fingertip,…
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 before2019-05-24 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on reviews of a medical record, it was determined that the facility failed to accurately evaluate and revise a resident nutritional care plan. This was evident for 1 (Resident #26) of 11 residents reviewed for nutrition during an annual recertification survey. The findings include: A care plan is a guide that addresses the unique needs of each resident. It is used to plan, assess and evaluate the effectiveness of the resident's care. A review of Resident #26's medical record on 05/20/19 revealed a nutritional care plan for weight loss that was initiated on 06/29/16 which revealed a 07/06/16 staff intervention to: weight per policy and alert dietician and physician to any significant loss or gain. Further review of Resident #26's medical record revealed the flowing weights: 04/03/19 - 144.8 02/07/19 - 153.0 10/19/18 - 163.2 Resident #26 suffered a 11.2 % (18.4 pounds) significant weight loss from 10/19/18 thru 04/03/19. On 04/10/19, Resident #26's physician assessed Resident #26 and placed Resident #26 on palliative care. The nursing staff have not revised Resident #26's…
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 · D2019-05-24 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide 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
Based on record review, observation and interview, it was determined the facility staff failed to provide care to promote the highest well-being for Residents (#47 and #71). This was evident for 1 of 2 residents selected for review of skin conditions and 2 of 53 residents selected for review during the annual survey process for quality of care. The findings include: 1. The facility staff failed to provide cushioning to side rails for Resident #47. Medical record review for Resident #47 revealed on 3/1/19 the physician ordered: cushion side rails. Further record review revealed the following nurses' note on 5/18/19 at 7:09 PM: resident noted with: right wrist lateral (side) and medial (middle) side-purple in color, right elbow bruised, base of thumb old purple bruise and left upper arm- large purple bruise. On 3/1/19 the physician ordered: Geri sleeves 3/1/19 always except for morning care the and the physician re-ordered the Geri sleeves on 5/21/19. Geri-Sleeves protect the upper extremities from abrasions, bruises, snags and tears throughout the day. They also help provide relief…
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 · D2019-05-24 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, observation and interview, it was determined the facility staff failed to provide an environment free from potential accidents for Residents (#5 and #47). This was evident for 2 of 53 residents selected for review during the annual survey process. The findings include: 1. The facility staff failed to maintain an environment free from potential accidents for Resident #5. Medical record review for Resident #5 revealed the following nurses' note: on 4/12/19 at 10:30 PM the facility staff documented: nurse found a stock pile of 5 Diazepam (Valium) and 1 Amlodipine (Norvasc) hidden in resident's drawer. This nurse crushes and watches resident swallow medications. Interview with the Director of Nursing on 5/23/19 at 11:00 AM revealed the facility staff failed to notify the staff of finding the medications at the bedside and failed to determine what the facility staff nurse did with the medications. It was determined at this time; the facility staff examined the resident's room and did not detect any medications at the bedside. Interview with the Director of Nursing…
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 · D2019-05-24 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review and interview, it was determined the facility staff failed to document the heart rate and blood pressure for Resident #35 when the physician ordered parameters. This was evident for 1 of 6 residents selected for un-necessary medication review and 1 of 53 residents selected for review during the annual survey process. The findings include: Medical record review for Resident #35 revealed on 4/24/19 the physician ordered: Metoprolol 50 milligrams by mouth 2 times a day for blood pressure, hold for systolic blood pressure (top number) less than 110 or heart rate less than 55. Metoprolol is used alone or in combination with other medications to treat high blood pressure. Metoprolol is in a class of medications called beta blockers. It works by relaxing blood vessels and slowing heart rate to improve blood flow and decrease blood pressure. Review of the Medication Administration Record revealed the facility staff documented the administration of the Metoprolol from 5/1/19 to 5/7/19 at 9:00 AM and 9:00 PM; however, failed to document the blood pressure 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.
- Potential for harm · D2019-05-24 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — isolatedDispose of garbage and refuse properly.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation during tour of the facility's dumpster area, it was determined the facility staff failed to dispose of garbage and refuse properly. This deficient practice has the potential to affect all residents. The findings include: An observation of the facility's dumpster/trash disposal area was conducted on 5/23/19 at 9:30 AM. Two plastic bags filled with uneaten food were observed on the ground beside the dumpster's. Plastic forks, sugar packets and straws were also observed on the ground. An uncovered trash can was observed on the back patio area outside the kitchen exit used to remove trash. The uncovered trash can contained old plastic wrap, Styrofoam drink cups, and a discarded bag of chips. Ants and flies were observed on and in the trash can. The findings were reviewed with the Foodservice Manager In-Training (Staff #13) upon returning to the kitchen.
- Potential for harm · D2019-05-24 · tag F0924 — isolatedPut firmly secured handrails on each side of hallways.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on surveyor observation during a tour of E wing, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure hand rails were secured firmly to the wall. This deficient practice has the potential to affect all residents within the unit. The findings include: On 5/24/2019 at 10:30 AM a tour of the facility's E wing was conducted. During this tour the handrails in the hallway outside the linen room, nourishment room, dining room and room [ROOM NUMBER] were observed to be loose and not securely affixed to the walls. The Administrator and DON were made aware of the findings during the exit conference on 5/24/19.
- No harm found · C2024-07-12 · tag F0732 — widespreadPost nurse staffing information every day.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure staffing information was posted daily and readily accessible to residents and visitors, during the first three days of the survey for 105 census residents. Findings include: During an observation on 07/08/24 at 8:35 AM, nurse staffing was not posted or available to residents or visitors. During an observation on 07/09/24 at 8:35 AM, nurse staffing was not posted or available to residents or visitors. During an observation on 07/10/24 at 8:35 AM, nurse staffing was not posted or available to residents or visitors. During an interview on 07/10/24 at 2:42 PM, the Director of Nursing (DON) stated they did not have nurse staffing posted in the facility and was unaware of the regulatory requirement. She stated they were currently completing the document so it could be posted.
“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
$55,564 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $55,564 — penalty dated 2024-07-12
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 COMPLETE CARE — 85 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 | 3 of 5 | 3.1 | -0.1 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 2.7 | +0.3 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 2.3 | +0.7 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 4.4 | -0.4 vs chain |
The other 84 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.1★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 84; lowest-rated first.
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PC MD OPCOS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 05/01/2021 |
| PC WTA OPCO HOLDCO LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 05/01/2021 |
| SMS 2021 TRUST | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 05/01/2021 |
| SILVERBERG, NISANEL | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 05/01/2021 |
| STEIN, SHALOM | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 05/01/2021 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 6 rows in the source record cover these 5 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
3 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 72% 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 $773K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in MD
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 Maryland 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 215114. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-12, 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.