Bear Mountain Health and Rehabilitation
500 Beaverdam Road, Asheville, NC 28804 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 77 certified beds · (828) 254-8833 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)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Aug 2023
- it has 2 actual-harm citations
- inspectors recorded 1 serious finding as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (29) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- nursing-staff turnover (60%) runs well above the national median (45%)
- about 27% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
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 | 3 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 | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 3 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 1 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 | 10.3% | 15.6% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 12.3% | 7.2% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 1.9% | 0.7% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 4.0% | 2.3% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 5.9% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star 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 | 4.0% | 3.5% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 7.7% | 18.3% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 32.2% | 21.3% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 97.0% | 94.1% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 7.7% | 5.5% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 17.8% | 20.7% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 15.9% | 14.0% | 17.1% | typical |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 3.8% | 1.4% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 89.2% | 78.1% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 22.7% | 22.9% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 9.0% | 12.9% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.13 | 1.78 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.25 | 1.80 | 1.80 | better |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ 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.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.55 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 85% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 5% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.4%CMS range 6.0–13.4 | 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.13 | 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 77 beds and averages 65.3 residents a day — about 85% occupied, or roughly 12 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.28 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.49 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.21 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 2.83 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.47 on weekdays — 18% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.55 to 0.35 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 60% is well above 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.
29 citations, most serious first. The 13 most serious are shown; the remaining 16 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · G2023-08-10 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, resident and staff interviews, Psychiatric Physician's Assistant interview, and the Medical Director interview the facility failed to protect the rights of a resident to be free from abuse. Resident #1 was found bleeding with a laceration to her upper lip, and a bruise to her right index finger and hand. Resident #2 had struck Resident #1 with the bed adjustment remote control causing the laceration to Resident #1's lip and pulled a ring from Resident #1's right index finger. This was for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for resident-to-resident abuse (Resident #2). Findings included: Resident #2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Chronic Obstruction Pulmonary Disorder (COPD), panic disorder, depression, and anxiety. The quarterly Minimum Data set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] coded Resident #2 as cognitively intact. She was assessed to need extensive assistance with bed mobility, dressing, toileting, and eating. Resident #2's care plan, dated 2/28/23 revealed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Actual harm · G2022-12-16 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews with the Medical Director and staff, the facility failed to notify the physician a resident's pain was not controlled after the administration of pain medication. The resident called emergency medical services and was evaluated for abdominal pain and diagnosed with acute cholecystitis (inflammation of the gallbladder) that required admission to the hospital for the surgical removal of the gallbladder for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for hospitalizations (Resident #270). The findings included: Resident #270 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including a history of cervical spine trauma and quadriplegia. Resident #270 was discharged to the hospital on [DATE] and returned to the facility on [DATE]. The quarterly Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] revealed Resident #270 was assessed as being cognitively intact. Routine and as needed pain medications were received during the lookback period and the resident reported his pain was moderate, frequent, and interfered with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Actual harm · G2022-12-16 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews with the Medical Director and staff the facility failed to complete a thorough assessment of a resident requesting to go to the emergency room due to increased pain. The resident called emergency medical services and was transported to the hospital and diagnosed with acute cholecystitis (inflammation of the gallbladder) that required surgical removal of the gallbladder for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for hospitalization (Resident #270). The findings included: Resident #270 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including a history of cervical spine trauma and quadriplegia. Resident #270 was discharged to the hospital on [DATE]. The quarterly Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] revealed Resident #270 was assessed as being cognitively intact. Routine and as needed pain medications were received during the lookback period and the resident reported his pain was moderate, frequent, and interfered with sleep and activities. Opioids (narcotic pain medications) were given…
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 before2025-12-30 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff, Pharmacist, and Medical Director interview, the facility failed to transcribe and implement orders for diabetes care according to the hospital discharge summary for a resident with diabetes. The hospital discharge summary ordered sitagliptin/metformin (Janumet extended release). The facility instead entered and administered metformin, omitting the sitagliptin component and the extended-release formulation. This deficient practice occurred for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for providing care according to professional standards (Resident #1).Findings included:A hospital Discharge summary dated [DATE] included the following medication order: metformin-sitagliptin (Janumet extended release (XR) 100 milligram (mg)-1000 mg oral tablet, 1 tablet by mouth daily for diabetes. According to manufacturer's information, metformin-sitagliptin is a combination of two medications and is marketed under the brand name of Janumet extended release XR.Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-12-30 · tag F0773 — isolatedProvide or obtain laboratory tests/services when ordered and promptly tell the ordering practitioner of the results.
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, Clinical Practice Manager, and Physician Assistant (PA) interviews, the facility failed to notify the medical provider of abnormal laboratory results for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for notification of laboratory results (Resident #1).Findings included:Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included Type-2 diabetes mellitus, hypertension (high blood pressure), long-term use of anticoagulants (blood thinning medication), metabolic encephalopathy (confusion caused by chemical imbalances in the body), malignant neoplasm of the pancreas (pancreatic cancer), hypo-osmolality (excess water relative to solutes such as electrolytes) and hyponatremia (low sodium level), anemia (low red blood cells), hypothyroidism (thyroid disorder), and a disorder of urea cycle metabolism (body cannot properly remove ammonia from the body).An admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #1 had severe cognitive impairment.A physician 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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-09 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to promote care in a dignified manner for 1 of 2 residents who were assisted with meals (Resident #2). Staff were observed standing beside the resident's bed while feeding assistance was provided. The finding included: Resident #2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including dysphagia and malnutrition. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] coded Resident #2 with intact cognition. The assessment indicated Resident #2 was dependent on staff for eating and receiving a mechanically altered diet. During a continuous breakfast observation on 05/07/25 from 9:01 AM to 9:10 AM, Resident #2 was observed seated at approximately 45-degree angle in her bed. Her breakfast tray was brought into the room by Nurse Aide (NA) #1 and placed on top of the overbed table in front of Resident #2. NA #1 stood on the left side of the bed. She set up the tray and started feeding Resident #2 while she was standing and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-09 · 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 staff interviews, the facility failed to accurately code Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments in the areas of Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) and high-risk drug classes usage that involved anticoagulant, antipsychotic, and opioid medications for 3 of the 7 sampled residents (Residents #11, #24, and #52). Findings included: a. Resident #11 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included high blood pressure and peripheral vascular disease. A review of the Medication Administration Records (MAR) for January 2025 revealed Resident #11 did not receive any anticoagulant throughout the month. Instead, the MAR indicated that he received 1 tablet of enteric-coated aspirin 81 milligrams (mg) by mouth once daily since 01/20/25. The quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] coded Resident #11 with intact cognition. The Medication section of the MDS indicated Resident #11 had received anticoagulant during the 7-day assessment periods. b. Resident #24 was admitted…
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 before2025-05-09 · tag F0644 — isolatedCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as 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 staff interview and medical record review, the facility failed to refer a resident with newly diagnosed serious mental illnesses for Pre-admission Screening and Annual Resident Review (PASARR) Level II screening for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for PASARR (Resident #36). The findings included: A review of Resident #36's medical records revealed he had a PASRR Level I evaluation completed in 2023. Resident #36 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including bipolar disorder. A review of Resident #36's list of cumulative diagnoses revealed a new diagnosis of bipolar disorder with an onset date of 03/13/24 was documented in his medical record. A review of physician's order dated 03/14/24 revealed Resident #36 had an order to receive 1 tablet of Depakote 500 milligrams (mg) delayed release by mouth 2 times daily for mood symptoms related to bipolar disorder. The annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] coded Resident #36 with intact cognition. The Section A1500 indicated he was not…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-09 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and Medical Director (MD), resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to readjust medication orders after those orders had been updated which resulted in the resident missing one dose of five medications for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for pharmacy services (Resident #36). The finding included: Resident #36 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including stroke, insomnia, and bipolar disorder. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] coded Resident #36 with intact cognition. The assessment indicated Resident #36 had adequate hearing and vision with clear speech. During the initial interview conducted with Resident #36 on 05/05/25 at 1:13 PM, he stated he disliked nursing staff waking him up around midnight at times to administer his medications. A review of medication administration records (MAR) on 05/05/25 revealed Resident #36 had the following 5 active physician's orders to receive medications once daily at either 8:00 PM or 10:00…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-09 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, observation, and staff interviews, the facility failed to intervene effectively when two residents became agitated and were yelling at each other in a common area. Resident #44 was cognitively impaired and had a history of violent behaviors caused Resident #229 to sustain a skin tear by hitting her on the hand with a cellphone. This deficient practice occurred for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for supervision to prevent accidents (Resident #229). The findings included: Resident #44 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included: hemiplegia (muscle weakness or partial paralysis on one side of the body) following cerebral infarction (stroke) affecting right dominant side, schizophrenia (psychiatric disorder), vascular dementia with mood disturbance, aphasia (brain disorder that affects the ability to communicate) following cerebral infarction, bipolar disorder (mood disorder), anxiety disorder, violent behaviors. Resident #44 was a current resident at the facility. 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 · D2025-05-09 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to keep a urinary catheter bag and drainage spout from touching the floor to reduce the risk of infection for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #62). This deficient practice occurred for 1 of 1 resident reviewed with a urinary catheter. Findings included: Resident #62 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had been re-admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His diagnoses included chronic obstructive uropathy. A significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #62 was never/rarely understood and his cognitive skills for daily decisions making were severely impaired. He was documented on the MDS as having an indwelling catheter. Resident #62 had a care plan dated 6/14/24 for long term indwelling catheter. The care plan interventions included positioning the catheter bag and tubing below the level of the bladder and away from the entrance room door. An order dated 4/3/25 read, indwelling urinary catheter…
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 · D2024-03-07 · tag F0554 — isolatedAllow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, resident, and staff interview the facility failed to assess a resident's ability to self-administer medications for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for medications at bedside (Resident #67). The findings included: Resident # 67 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis that included type 2 diabetes mellitus with hyperglycemia and congestive heart failure. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed that Resident #67 was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #67's medical record revealed no documentation that Resident #67 had been assessed to self-administer medications at bedside. An in-room observation and interview with Resident #67 on 3/4/24 at 11:17 AM revealed a medication cup sitting on Resident #67's overbed table containing 11 pills. Resident #67 stated the nurse had brought her medication to her about 30 minutes prior for her to take. Resident #67 said she told the nurse she would take the pills after she used the bathroom,…
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 before2024-03-07 · tag F0644 — isolatedCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as 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 record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure a Level II Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) was completed for a resident with new mental health diagnoses for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for PASRR (Resident #23). The findings included: Review of Resident #23's medical record revealed the resident had a PASRR level I completed prior to his admission dated 8/3/17. He was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of bipolar disorder and anxiety disorder. A diagnosis of major depressive disorder was added on 8/29/23. Review of Resident #23's medical records revealed no PASRR level II had been completed. Review of Resident #23's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed he had not been evaluated by Level II PASRR. During an interview on 3/6/24 at 2:25 pm, the Interim Administrator and the Social Worker (SW) explained the facility's PASRR process. The SW stated all residents had PASRR when they got to the facility. Their diagnoses determined what kind 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.
Show the remaining 16 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-03-07 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and resident and staff interviews the facility administered a medicated powder without a physician's order for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for professional standards of practice (Resident #21). The findings included: Resident #21 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed that Resident #21 was cognitively intact. A review of Resident #21's active physician orders for March 2024 revealed that there was not an order for nystatin powder. An in-room observation and interview with Resident #21 occurred on 3/04/24 at 11:08 AM. A bottle labeled nystatin topical powder was observed on Resident #21's overbed table. She stated it was brought to her the previous night and left on the table and the bottle was left in her room often. Resident # 21 stated the nursing assistants applied the powder on to her. Resident # 21's Unit Manager who was Resident #21's assigned nurse was interviewed on 3/04/24 at 11:11 AM and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2022-12-16 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and manufacturer recommendations, the facility failed to date, remove, or discard potentially hazardous foods stored for use with signs of spoilage, store foods in sealed containers and store nonperishable foods off the floor. This failure occurred in 1 of 3 refrigeration units, 1 of 1 freezer and 1 of 1 dry storage rooms with the potential to affect 65 of 67 residents. The findings included: 1. An observation of reach-in refrigerator #2 on 12/12/22 at 9:53 AM with the Food Service Manager (FSM) revealed the following: a. A sixteen-ounce bag of red grapes, open to air, with white/black, hair-like growth; no date of opening/use by date. b. A sixteen-ounce bag of green grapes, open to air; no date of opening/use by date. c. Six stalks of celery with a manufacturer pack date of 11/7/22, stored in a box open to air, brown discoloration, wilted, and wrinkled without date of opening/use by. d. One unopened clear plastic bag of coleslaw mix (shredded cabbage and shredded carrots) with a received date of 11/10/22 and manufacturer use by date of 11/19/22,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2022-12-16 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and staff interviews, the facility's Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) Committee failed to maintain implemented procedures and monitor the interventions that the committee put into place following a focused infection control survey completed on 01/04/21, a recertification and complaint investigation survey completed on 01/28/22, and a follow-up revisit and complaint investigation survey completed on 05/05/22. This was for one repeat deficiency in the area of COVID-19 testing of residents and staff that was originally cited on 01/04/21 during a focused infection control survey and eight repeat deficiencies in the areas of safe, clean and homelike environment, comprehensive assessments and timing, quarterly assessments at least every three months, baseline care plan, develop/implement comprehensive care plans, provision of medically related social services, medication storage, and prepare/store/serve food under sanitary conditions that were originally cited on 01/28/22…
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 · E2022-12-16 · tag F0636 — patternAssess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
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 complete comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments within 14 days of the Assessment Reference Date (ARD, last day of the assessment period) for 8 of 9 residents reviewed for Resident Assessments (Residents #15, #38, #41, #45, #47, #60, #223, and #220). Findings included: 1. Resident #15 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident #15's medical record revealed an annual MDS assessment with an ARD of 11/06/22 that was marked as completed on 12/13/22. During an interview on 12/14/22 at 11:00 AM, the MDS Coordinator explained that prior to her starting employment in November 2022, the facility was without a MDS Coordinator for approximately 7 months and although staff from other facilities as well as corporate staff filled in as they could, MDS assessments got behind and they now had a lot of catching up to do. The MDS Coordinator verified Resident #15's annual MDS assessment dated [DATE] was not completed within the regulatory…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2022-12-16 · tag F0638 — patternAssure that each resident’s assessment is updated at least once every 3 months.
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 complete quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments within 14 days of the Assessment Reference Date (ARD, the last day of the observation period) for 6 of 9 residents reviewed for Resident Assessments (Residents #41, #45, #46, #47, #56 and #60). Findings included: 1. Resident #41 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident #41's medical record revealed a quarterly MDS assessment with an ARD of 11/02/22 that was marked as completed on 12/13/22. During an interview on 12/14/22 at 11:00 AM, the MDS Coordinator explained that prior to her starting employment in November 2022, the facility was without a MDS Coordinator for approximately 7 months and although staff from other facilities as well as corporate staff filled in as they could, MDS assessments got behind and they now had a lot of catching up to do. The MDS Coordinator verified Resident #41's quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] was not completed within the regulatory time…
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 · E2022-12-16 · tag F0745 — failed to provide medically-related social services — patternProvide medically-related social services to help each resident achieve the highest possible quality of life.
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, Medical Doctor (MD) and staff interviews, the facility failed to refer residents for consultation appointments per MD order for 2 of 4 sampled residents (Resident #38 and #45). Findings included: 1. Resident #38 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His diagnoses included occlusion and stenosis of unspecified carotid artery (narrowing or blockage of the large arteries on either side of the neck) and personal history of transient ischemic attack (mini-stroke caused by a temporary disruption in the blood supply to part of the brain). An active MD order dated 08/31/22 for Resident #38 read in part, referral to Vascular MD (a doctor who specializes in the treatment of arteries and veins) for carotid stenosis. A MD progress note dated 12/07/22 for Resident #38 read in part, referral to Vascular MD for carotid artery stenosis. Review of Resident #38's medical record revealed no documentation related to an appointment with a Vascular MD. During an interview on 12/15/22 at 2:54 PM, 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 · E2022-12-16 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure 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 observation, staff interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to store unopened medications in the temperatures specified by manufacturer's guidelines for 2 or 4 medications carts observed (East Front and East Back medication carts) during medication storage checks. The findings included: 1. Review of manufacturer's package insert for insulin Aspart indicated unused insulin Aspart should be stored in a refrigerator between 36° to 46° Fahrenheit (F). Once opened, the insulin pen may be stored at room temperature up to 86 F for up to 28 days. Review of manufacturer's package insert for Latanoprost eye drops reveled unopened bottle should be stored under refrigeration between 36° to 46°F and protected from light. Once opened, Latanoprost may be stored at room temperature up to 77F for up to six weeks. An observation was conducted on 12/13/22 at 3:58 PM for the East Front medication cart in the presence of Nurse #1. The observation revealed one unopened bottle of Latanoprost eye drop still in the plastic seal, and 1 unopened pen of insulin aspart also wrapped in the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-12-16 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
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 develop and implement a baseline care plan within 48 hours of admission to address the immediate needs for 1of 5 residents reviewed for new admissions (Resident #50). The findings included: Review of the hospital Discharge summary dated [DATE] revealed Resident #50 had fallen at home, was sent to the hospital and diagnosed with a fractured right ankle. After an orthopedic consult, an open reduction and internal fixation surgical procedure was done on 10/26/22 to stabilize the right ankle. Resident #50 was discharged with instructions including to only bear 25% of weight to the right lower extremity, elevate the right leg for swelling, apply a controlled ankle motion (CAM) boot to the right ankle when out of bed, and to use fall precautions. Resident #50 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Alzheimer's, a fracture of the right ankle, and chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia (decreased oxygen levels). 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 · D2022-12-16 · tag F0660 — isolatedPlan the resident's discharge to meet the resident's goals and needs.
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, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to have a discharge planning process in place that incorporated the resident in the development of a discharge plan that addressed the resident's discharge goals and post-discharge needs for a resident who wished to discharge to the community for 1 of 2 sampled residents (Resident #45). Findings included: Resident #45 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (difficulty breathing), congestive heart failure and depression. A social services progress note written by the Social Worker (SW) on 04/07/22 revealed Resident #45 was approved for a Medicaid program that helped individuals residing in nursing homes transition to their home in the community with support. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated Resident #45 had moderate impairment in cognition. The MDS noted active discharge planning was in place and a referral was made to the local contact agency…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-12-16 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
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 resident, staff, Consultant Pharmacist, Nurse Practitioner (NP), and Medical Director (MD), the Consultant Pharmacist failed to identify drug irregularities and provide recommendations for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications (Resident #44). The findings included: Review of the lipid guidelines published in 2019 by the American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association indicated lipid panel should be conducted at baseline, then 4 to 12 weeks after statin therapy was started or when dosage was adjusted. Afterwards, lipid panel test should be repeated once every 3 to 12 months as needed. Resident #44 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included hyperlipidemia and high blood pressure. Review of physician's orders revealed Resident #44 had obtained orders to receive 1 tablet of atorvastatin 80 milligrams (mg) once daily at bedtime for high cholesterol since 09/24/21. On 06/03/22, dosage of atorvastatin was reduced to 40…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-12-16 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews with the resident, staff, Consultant Pharmacist, Nurse Practitioner (NP), and Medical Director (MD), the facility failed to monitor cholesterol level for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications (Resident #44). The findings included: Review of the lipid guidelines published in 2019 by the American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association indicated lipid panel should be conducted at baseline, then 4 to 12 weeks after statin therapy was started or when dosage was adjusted. Afterwards, lipid panel test should be repeated once every 3 to 12 months as needed. Resident #44 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included hyperlipidemia and high blood pressure. Review of physician's orders revealed Resident #44 had obtained orders to receive 1 tablet of atorvastatin 80 milligrams (mg) once daily at bedtime for high cholesterol since 09/24/21. On 06/03/22, dosage of atorvastatin was reduced to 40 mg once daily in the morning. Starting…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-12-16 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
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 Pharmacist in Charge and the Medical Director the facility failed to ensure an as needed psychotropic medication was used for a limited duration of time of 14 days or provide a rational to continue the use for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications (Resident #50). The findings included: Review of the hospital Discharge summary dated [DATE] listed the medications Resident #50 was to continue taking and included instructions to give trazodone (an antidepressant medication) 50 milligrams (mg) every night at bedtime as needed for insomnia. Resident #50 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Alzheimer's, diabetes mellitus, chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia (decreased oxygen levels), and chronic kidney disease. Resident #50 was discharge to the hospital on [DATE]. Review of the physician orders revealed trazodone 50 mg give 1 tablet as needed for insomnia was started on 11/16/22. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set,…
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.
- No harm found · Bcited before2024-03-07 · tag F0638 — patternAssure that each resident’s assessment is updated at least once every 3 months.
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 complete quarterly assessments within the regulated time frames for 3 of 3 residents reviewed for completion of quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments (Residents # 34, #15, #69). The findings included: 1. Resident #34 was admitted to the facility 8/29/18. The quarterly MDS assessment with an assessment reference date (the last day of the assessment period) of 2/8/24 was reviewed and revealed the assessment was still in progress on 3/6/24. The MDS Coordinator was interviewed on 3/6/24 at 9:25 AM and stated she had been working at the facility for one month and was aware of the late quarterly MDS assessment. The MDS Coordinator stated the facility had been without a MDS Coordinator and had a plan to complete late assessments. The Interim Administrator stated on 3/7/24 at 11:32 AM the MDS quarterly assessments should have been completed on time. The facility was working on a plan to catch up on the late MDS assessments. 2. Resident #15 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.
- No harm found · Bcited before2024-03-07 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — patternSet 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 observations, record review and staff interview, the facility's Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) Committee failed to maintain implemented procedures and monitor interventions the committee put into place following the recertification surveys conducted on 1/28/22 and 12/16/22. This was for a repeat deficiency in the area of quarterly assessments that was originally cited on 1/28/22 during the recertification survey, and subsequently recited during the recertification survey on 12/16/22 and the recertification survey completed on 3/7/24. The continued failure of the facility during three federal surveys of record shows a pattern of the facility's inability to sustain an effective QAA program. The findings included: This tag is cross-referenced to: F638 - Based on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to complete quarterly assessments within the regulated time frames for 3 of 3 residents reviewed for completion of quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments (Residents # 34, #15, #69). During the recertification survey on 1/28/22, the facility failed 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.
- No harm found · B2022-12-16 · 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 record review, observations, and staff interviews the facility failed to remove a black colored substance and repair caulking around the base of the toilet (room [ROOM NUMBER], #116, #117, #118). Two of the rooms (Rooms #117 and #118) had a strong odor resembling the smell of urine. The facility failed to remove black colored corrosion and repair missing paint to the portion of a metal door frame in contact with the bathroom floor (room [ROOM NUMBER]); and failed to repair walls with linear gouges in the sheetrock (Rooms #117 and #118) and repair a hole in the sheetrock (room [ROOM NUMBER]) for 1 of 2 hallways reviewed for safe, clean, and homelike environment. The findings included: Review of the facility's estimates and billing for repairs made in 2022 revealed caulking the base of toilets, repair and paint gouges and holes to damage sheetrock, and removal of corrosion and paint a bathroom door were not included for the rooms observed with environment issues. 1a. An observation on 12/12/22 at 10:24 AM…
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.
- No harm found · B2022-12-16 · tag F0886 — failed to test for COVID-19 as required — patternPerform COVID19 testing on residents and staff.
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 maintain COVID-19 test results in the residents' medical record for 5 of 5 sampled residents reviewed (Resident #6, Resident #21, Resident #43, Resident #52, and Resident #56). Findings included: The facility's COVID-19 test results binders revealed COVID-19 rapid antigen tests were completed on residents during the following dates/weeks: 06/03/22 to 06/04/22, 06/05/22 to 06/11/22, 06/12/22 to 06/18/22, 06/26/22 to 06/27/22, 11/21/22 to 11/26/22, 11/27/22 to 12/03/22, and 12/04/22 to 12/10/22. 1. Resident #6 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident #6's medical record revealed a nurse progress note dated 11/30/22 at 4:23 PM that noted Resident #6 tested positive for COVID-19. Further review revealed no additional documentation of COVID-19 test results since December 2021. A joint interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON) and Regional Nurse Consultant on 12/14/22 at 4:04 PM. The DON explained each resident'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.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to ASCENT HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT — 6 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 | 2.2 | +0.8 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 2.5 | +0.5 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 2.0 | +1.0 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 3 of 5 | 2.8 | +0.2 vs chain |
The other 5 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.2★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NEBO HOLDCO LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 05/01/2024 |
| BADIMU, KAMUINA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2025 |
| CRUM, KATHERINE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2025 |
| FRIEDMAN, YISROEL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 05/01/2024 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 6 rows in the source record cover these 4 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
1 organizational owner 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 83% 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 $2.2M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 27% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in NC
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 North Carolina 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 345010. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-05-09, 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.