Forrest Oakes Healthcare

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.

46.9% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 69 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 62.5% 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 24 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 0.47 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 78% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 14% 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 60 beds and averages 52.5 residents a day — about 88% occupied, or roughly 8 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 3.27 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.46 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.27 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 2.96 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.40 on weekdays — 13% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.56 to 0.21 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 55% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

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

30 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 20 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · D2026-05-29 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolated
  Protect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
  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 staff interviews, the facility failed to protect the resident's right to be free from misappropriation of personal funds when the Medical Records Manager accepted money from the resident for cleaning his personal apartment. The Medical Records Manager was alleged to have accepted $280.00 from Resident #60 on 4/17/26. This deficient practice occurred for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for misappropriation of resident property (Resident #60).The findings included:A review of the facility's policy entitled Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation revised on 10/14/25 read in part: Misappropriation of resident property means the deliberate misplacement, exploitation, or wrongful temporary or permanent, use of a resident's belongings or money without the resident's consent.A review of the facility's undated code of ethics read in part: Accepting any gift or gratuity from a patient or family member is strictly prohibited. Resident #60 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with 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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-05-29 · tag F0645 — isolated
  PASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
  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 staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure a Level I Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) was completed prior to admission for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for PASRR (Resident #7).The findings included:The North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services (NCDHHS) PASRR determination letter dated 5/11/2023 for Resident #7 indicated a Level I screen and provided a PASRR number that remained valid for the duration of the individual's stay (this Level I screen was not requested by or for the current facility). The letter stated that no additional PASRR screening was required unless a significant change in the individual's condition occurred, which could suggest a diagnosis related to mental illness.Resident #7 was admitted from home to the facility on 3/30/2026 with a diagnosis of post traumatic stress disorder.The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated that Resident #7 was cognitively intact and was not currently considered by the state Level II…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-29 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
  Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews with the Nurse Practitioner and staff, the facility failed to accurately transcribe and carry out physician orders for protective skin care for 1 of 3 residents reviewed with pressure ulcers (Resident #48).The findings included: Resident #48 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included contractures of both knees and protein calorie malnutrition. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], indicated Resident #48 had severely impaired cognition and limited range of motion to both lower extremities. She was coded with one unstageable pressure ulcer. A review of Resident #48's care plan, last reviewed 6/23/25, included a focus area for impaired mobility, thin/fragile skin, poor oral intake. She is under hospice care due to terminal prognosis of vascular dementia. She has actual impairment to skin integrity related to deep tissue injury wound of the right hip and blisters to right inner ankle and left posterior thigh. The interventions…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-29 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
  Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record reviews, staff, and Nurse Practitioner interviews, the facility failed to ensure oxygen was delivered at the prescribed rate for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for respiratory care (Resident #46).The findings included:Resident #46 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of acute and chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia (when tissues and cells do not receive enough oxygen to function properly), asthma, alveolar hypoventilation (breathing is too shallow or slow to meet the body's metabolic needs), and acute and chronic respiratory failure with hypercapnia (an abnormally elevated level of carbon dioxide).A review of Resident #46's care plan revealed a focus area revised on 11/29/23 that read Resident #46 had potential for altered respiratory status/difficulty breathing. An intervention initiated on 1/21/26 indicated the resident would receive oxygen at 3 liters per minute (lpm) continuously via nasal cannula.A review of Resident #46's active orders included an order dated…

  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 · D2026-05-29 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
  Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on manufacturer recommendations, observations, record reviews, and staff interviews, the facility failed to date multi use medications upon opening and failed to refrigerate unopened medication per manufacturer instructions on 1 of 3 medication carts reviewed (D Hall Cart).The findings included: Review of the manufacturer's guidelines for Rhopressa eye drops instructed to refrigerate unopened bottles.Review of the manufacturer's guidelines for Brimonidine Tartrate required discarding the medication 28 to 30 days after opening.Review of the manufacturer's guidelines for Erythromycin ophthalmic ointment read to discard the ointment within 28 days of opening.Review of the manufacturer's guidelines for Latanoprost eye drops read it must be discarded four to six weeks after opening.An observation was conducted on 5/28/26 at 10:00 AM of the D Hall medication cart in the presence of Medication Aide (MA) #1. The observation revealed the following medications stored in the medication cart:One (1) bottle of Rhopressa eye drops (a prescription eye drop used to lower high pressure inside…

  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 · D2025-03-13 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
  Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, observations, and staff and Nurse Practitioner interviews, the facility failed to keep a urinary catheter bag and its tubing from touching the floor to reduce the risk of infection for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #33) reviewed. Findings included: Resident #33 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A Physician's Order dated 10/11/2024 indicated Resident #33 required an indwelling urinary catheter. A quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] indicated he was cognitively intact and had an indwelling urinary catheter. Resident #33's Care Plan dated 3/8/2025 indicated he had an indwelling suprapubic urinary catheter. During an observation of Resident #33 on 3/12/2025 at 9:45 am he was found to be in bed and his urinary catheter drainage bag was lying on the floor beside his bed. There was no hook on the urinary catheter bag to attach it to the bed frame. Nurse Aide #1 came to the room and emptied Resident #33's urinary catheter bag and stated she would get the Unit Manager to replace…

  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 · Ecited before2025-02-06 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — pattern
  Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record reviews, and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure a safe environment as evidenced by exposed wires to the bed control cord (room [ROOM NUMBER]) and to clean the vents of the Packaged Terminal Air Conditioner (PTAC-room [ROOM NUMBER]). The facility also failed to ensure resident rooms were clean and in good repair (Rooms #112, 128, 144, 120, 122, 126, and 129). This was for 8 of 18 resident rooms reviewed for comfortable, clean and homelike environment. The findings included: 1a. On 2/3/25 at 11:33 AM, room [ROOM NUMBER]'s bed control was observed lying on the mattress to the right of the resident's pillow. The bed control cord was noted with approximately 1 inch of yellow electrical tape below the control box. Beyond the yellow electrical tape was approximately ¼ inch of exposed wires showing. On 2/5/25 at 9:00 AM, the Maintenance Director observed the bed control unit for room [ROOM NUMBER]. He explained that the outer casing protecting the wires tore very easily. He…

  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 · E2025-02-06 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — pattern
  Develop 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record reviews, observations, and staff interviews, the facility failed to review and revise a care plan following the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment in the area of falls (Resident #6) and failed to revise the care plan in the area of side rails (Resident #31). In addition, the facility failed to develop an individualized and comprehensive care plan in the area of Activities of Daily Living (Residents #51 and #205) This was for 4 of 18 resident records reviewed. The findings included: 1. Resident #6 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included history of a stroke and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The active care plan was last reviewed and revised on 10/3/24. There was a focus area for risk for falls related to history of falls, impaired gait/balance problems related to stroke with weakness, potential side effects related to use of psychoactive medications, poor safety awareness and impulsive behaviors. One of the interventions included a fall mat to…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-02-06 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — pattern
  Provide 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record reviews, observations, and family, resident, and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide nail care and/or incontinence care for 8 of 13 residents dependent on staff for activities of daily living (ADL) (Residents #9, #32, #35, #51, #205, #1, #206, and #33). The findings included: 1a. Resident #9 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included a history of a fractured right femur, history of a stroke, Alzheimer's disease, and diabetes. The care plan updated 7/18/24 indicated Resident #9 required one person staff assist for bathing and personal hygiene. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #9 was cognitively intact. There were no mood concerns, but it was noted that the resident was coded for rejection of care. Resident #9 was dependent on staff for toileting, bathing, and personal care and was incontinent of bowel and bladder. A review of the shower sheets for Resident #9 indicated that on 2/3/25 the resident was given a shower, but…

  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 · E2025-02-06 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — pattern
  Provide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations, record reviews, staff interviews, resident interviews, and resident family interviews, the facility failed to provide sufficient nursing staff to provide incontinence care in a manner to maintain the residents' dignity (Resident #1, #206, and #9) and failed to provide assistance with Activities of Daily Living (ADL) to residents who required extensive to total care with nail care and incontinence care (Residents #9, #32, #35, #51, #205, #1, #206, and #33). This affected 8 of 18 sampled residents reviewed for sufficient staffing. The findings included: This tag is cross-referred to: 1. F550: Based on record review, observations, resident, resident family, and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide incontinence care in a manner to maintain the residents' dignity for 3 of 5 residents reviewed for dignity (Residents #1, #206 ,and #9). 2. F677: Based on record reviews, observations, and family, resident, and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide nail care and/or incontinence care for 8 of 13 residents dependent on staff for activities of daily…

  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.

  Nursing and Physician Services 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

$5,242 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $5,242 — penalty dated 2025-02-06

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 AVARDIS HEALTH — 38 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 26 rows in the source record cover these 16 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

10 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.

This home reported $366K 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 NC