No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Highland Farms

200 Tabernacle Road, Black Mountain, NC 28711 · Non profit - Corporation · 60 certified beds · (828) 669-6473 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (828) 669-6473 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
$4,271 in federal fines
Insights

This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (28% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
Worth asking about
  • the CMS record shows $4,271 in federal fines (most recent 2024-08-22)

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.

5/5
CMS overall
5 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 5 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Urgent care / clinic
3164 US 70 Hwy · (828) 669-4505 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
3130 US 70 Hwy · (828) 669-9970 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
3018 US 70 Hwy · (828) 669-8988 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Kitsuma Mountain Bike Trail · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 3 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 5 of 5

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 5 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.

Overall rating5★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased25.8%15.6%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight6.3%7.2%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder1.0%0.7%0.9%typical
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection3.9%2.3%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms3.9%5.9%6.5%better
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.0%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury11.1%3.5%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened17.8%18.3%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication6.8%21.3%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%94.1%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers5.5%5.5%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control30.1%20.7%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table2.1%14.0%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%1.4%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine96.3%78.1%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission13.7%22.9%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit10.5%12.9%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.601.781.67typical
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.481.801.80better

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.

50.5% 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 136 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

50.5%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
8.5%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
52.1%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.60U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.22hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.23hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.15hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 52.1% 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 71 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 0.60 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 88% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 11% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF50.5%CMS range 44.4–58.251.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF8.5%CMS range 6.0–12.610.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no 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 discharge52.1%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge59.1%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge28.2%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified85.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot 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 discharge91.8%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay1.3%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization6.3%CMS range 3.5–10.17.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.841.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS 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

1.33
RN hours/ resident / day
0.73
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.86
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.92
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.90
RN hoursweekends
28.1%
Total nursing turnover
15.4%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 60 beds and averages 47.8 residents a day — about 80% 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 4.92 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.33 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.86 is at or above 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 4.33 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.16 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.51 to 0.90 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 28% is below the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

3
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-08-15)
4
at the previous standard inspection (2024-08-22)

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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.

14 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-08-15 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations and staff interviews the facility failed to label and date leftover food stored for use in 1 of 1 walk in cooler and 1 of 1 walk-in freezer and failed to discard expired food items in 1 of 1 dry goods storage room. These practices had the potential to affect food served to residents. The findings included:a. During an initial observation of the facility's kitchen with the Dietary Manager (DM) on 08/11/2025 at 10:37AM the walk-in cooler was noted to have the following concerns:- An open to air and unlabeled ripped plastic bag of cooked chicken fillets on a shelf available for use.- An opened and unlabeled plastic wrapped bag of thin sliced potatoes on a shelf available for use. b. During an initial observation of the facility's kitchen with the Dietary Manager (DM) on 08/11/2025 at 10:43AM the walk-in freezer was noted to have frozen angel food cake on a tray wrapped in plastic, labeled 7/1 use by 7/21 on a shelf, available for use. c. The dry goods storage room was observed in the presence of the Dietary Manager on 08/11/2025 at 11:03AM with the following…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-08-15 · tag F0559 — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to share a room with spouse or roommate of choice and receive written notice before a change is made.
    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 responsible party (RP) and staff interviews, the facility failed to notify the Responsible Party in advance of a room change for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for transfer to a new room in the facility (Resident #4).The findings included:Resident #4 was admitted to the facility on [DATE].The Minimum Data Set (MDS) quarterly assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #4 was moderately cognitively impaired. Review of a note written by the Social Service Director dated 5/20/2025 revealed the Social Service Director called and left the Responsible Party (RP) a voice mail informing them of the room change for Resident #4 and an email was sent. There was no documentation in the social service notes that indicated notification to the residents or RP of reason for the room change.A review of an email sent on 5/20/2025 at 10:23 AM by the Social Service Director to the Responsible Party revealed the email was delivered on 5/20/2025 and indicated that a voice mail was left for the RP that Resident #4…

    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 · D2025-08-15 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, Security Officer interview, Independent Living (IL) Resident interview, and staff interviews, the facility failed to supervise a severely cognitively impaired resident who was known to wander and used a wander guard so staff could monitor whereabouts. On 5/25/2025, Nurse #3 disarmed the service hallway exit doors and overrode the wander guard system. Resident #3 exited the healthcare center and entered a service hallway to the old assembly room area in the independent living area of the continuing care retirement community without staff supervision. Resident #3 was returned to the healthcare center by an IL Resident and the Lead [NAME] without injury. This deficient practice affected 1 of 5 residents reviewed for accidents (Resident #3).The findings included:Resident #3 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of senile degeneration of the brain, dementia, and history of falling.Resident #3's care plan dated 2/08/2025 revealed a care plan for wander guard…

    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 · D2024-08-22 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — isolated
    Ensure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
    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 provide competent nursing staff when 2 of 4 nursing staff (Nurse #1 and Medication Aide #1) were not educated on the facility's glucometer disinfection policy and procedures. Findings included: a. An observation was conducted on 8/21/24 at 4:30 PM of Nurse #1 performing a blood glucose check. After performing the blood glucose check Nurse #1 returned the glucometer to the top drawer of the medication cart without disinfecting the glucometer. An interview with was conducted on 8/21/24 at 4:40 PM with Nurse #1. She said she had not cleaned the glucometer after performing the blood glucose check because she had not been aware that she needed to do so. Nurse #1 said she had worked at the facility for about 3 months and that she had not received education or training on glucometer disinfection. Nurse #1's employee file revealed there was no record of education on glucometer disinfection. b. An interview was conducted with Medication…

    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
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-22 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, record review, and staff interviews the facility failed to implement their policy and procedures for glucometer disinfection when Nurse #1 failed to disinfect a resident (Resident #201) glucometer after performing a capillary blood glucose test. This deficient practice occurred for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #201) reviewed for infection prevention and control. The findings included: The facility policy dated 5/29/24 and entitled Glucometer Disinfection read in part: The purpose of this procedure is to provide guidelines for the disinfection of capillary-blood glucose sampling devices to prevent transmission of blood borne disease to resident and employees. The facility will ensure blood glucometers will be cleaned and disinfected after each use and according to manufacturer's instructions. The glucometers will be disinfected with a wipe pre-saturated with an EPA registered healthcare disinfectant that is effective against Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) (blood borne virus), Hepatitis C (blood borne virus), and Hepatitis B (blood borne virus). Glucometers…

    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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-22 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolated
    Develop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, resident and staff interviews the facility failed to administer a pneumococcal vaccine to a resident who had consented for the vaccine to be administered. This deficient practice occurred for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for Pneumococcal Immunizations (Resident #18). The findings included: Resident #18 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The quarterly Minimum Data Assessment (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #18 was cognitively intact. It was not documented on the MDS that she had received the pneumonia vaccine. Review of Resident #18's medical record revealed a form titled Resident Vaccine Consent Form. The pneumococcal vaccine was marked under the section entitled check vaccines consented to be given. The vaccine consent signature section indicated verbal consent was provided by Resident #18's family during a video conference and was dated 7/18/24. Review of Resident #18's medical record revealed there was no documentation that a pneumococcal vaccine had been administered. There 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-22 · tag F0887 — isolated
    Educate residents and staff on COVID-19 vaccination, offer the COVID-19 vaccine to eligible residents and staff after education, and properly document each resident and staff member's vaccination status.
    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 offer and provide a COVID-19 vaccine to 1 of 5 residents reviewed for COVID-19 immunizations (Resident #42). The findings included: Resident #42 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The admission Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #42 had moderate cognitive impairment. Review of Resident #42's medical record revealed he had last received a COVID-19 vaccine prior to admission on [DATE]. There was no documentation in the medical record that indicated the COVID-19 vaccine had been offered to Resident #42. An interview was conducted on 8/21/24 at 3:40 PM with Resident #42. He stated that the facility had not discussed or offered the COVID-19 vaccine with him since his admission to the facility. Resident #42 said that it had been more than a year since he had last received a COVID-19 vaccine. He said he had not received the newest recommended COVID-19 vaccine. Resident #42 said that if he was able to get 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-04-27 · tag F0626 — pattern
    Permit a resident to return to the nursing home after hospitalization or therapeutic leave that exceeds bed-hold policy.
    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, Responsible Party, and staff the facility failed to allow a resident who experienced delusions and exit seeking behaviors to return to the facility following a hospital admission using the resident's behaviors prior to transfer as a basis for their decision for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for hospitalization (Resident #252). Resident #252 remained in the hospital from [DATE] through 11/09/22 waiting for placement to another facility. The findings included: Resident # 252 was admitted to the facility 08/02/22 with diagnoses including Parkinson's disease and dementia. Review of the care plan started on 08/05/22 identified Resident #252 as having impaired decision making related to his dementia that included behaviors and being at risk for elopement. Interventions included: to provide a consistent physical environment and daily routine; determine where the resident was going and validate his need to find someone or something; provide close monitoring…

    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 · Ecited before2023-04-27 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations and staff interviews the facility failed to remove expired food from 1 of 1 dry food storage rooms and from 1 of 4 kitchen refrigerators (lift top refrigerator). This practice had the potential to affect food served to residents. Findings included. A. On 4/24/23 at 8:49 AM an observation of the dry goods storage room in the kitchen with the Dietary Manager (DM) revealed one opened package of pancake mix with the date 3/12 use by 4/12 written on it. The DM immediately removed the package of pancake mix and stated that a kitchen staff was assigned to check the dry storage food area for expired food 5 days every week in the evenings. The DM said pancake mix was overlooked when the dry goods storage room was checked the previous Friday. B. On 4/24/23 at 9:17 AM an observation of a reach-in flip top refrigerator found an opened 1-gallon milk container, with an expiration date of 4/17/23 printed on the container. The DM immediately removed the milk container. He stated all refrigerators in the kitchen are checked nightly for any expired food items and disposed 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-04-27 · tag F0636 — isolated
    Assess 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 care area assessments to address underlying causes and contributing factors for the triggered areas for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medication. (Residents #33). The findings included: Resident #33 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Section V (Care Area Assessment Summary) for the significant change in status Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed 8 care areas had been triggered. Five of the care area assessments (CAAs) triggered did not contain any analysis addressing the nature of Resident #33's condition, the presence of causes and contributing factors, risk factors related to the care area, and the reasons for a decision to proceed with care planning. The incomplete CAAs consisted of psychotropic drug use, activities of daily livings functional and rehabilitation potential, urinary incontinence and indwelling catheter, falls, and pressure ulcer/injury. The most recent quarterly MDS dated [DATE]…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-04-27 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolated
    Ensure 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 (Residents #7). The findings included: Resident #7 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses included hyperlipidemia. Review of physician's orders dated 03/07/20 revealed Resident #7 had an order to receive 1 tablet of atorvastatin 20 milligrams (mg) once daily for hyperlipidemia since its initiation. Review of Resident #7's medical records revealed her last lipid panel was completed on 09/08/20. No subsequent lipid panel had been documented since then. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] assessed Resident #7 with moderate impaired cognition. A review of medication administration records (MARs) on 04/24/23 indicated Resident #7 had received atorvastatin 20 mg once daily at bedtime as ordered since its…

    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 · D2023-04-27 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolated
    Ensure 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 the cholesterol level for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications (Residents #7). The findings included: Resident #7 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses included hyperlipidemia. Review of physician's orders dated 03/07/20 revealed Resident #7 had an order to receive 1 tablet of atorvastatin 20 milligrams (mg) once daily for hyperlipidemia since its initiation on 03/07/20. Review of Resident #7's medical records revealed her last lipid panel was completed on 09/08/20. No subsequent lipid panel had been documented since then. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] assessed Resident #7 with moderately impaired cognition. A review of medication administration records (MARs) on 04/24/23 indicated Resident #7 had received atorvastatin 20 mg once daily at bedtime as ordered since its initiation. During an…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-04-27 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — isolated
    Set 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 record review and staff interviews, the facility's Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) Committee failed to maintain implemented procedures and monitor interventions previously put in place following the annual recertification survey conducted on 07/28/21. This was for one deficiency originally cited in July 2021 in the area of Drug Regimen is Free from Unnecessary Drugs and was subsequently recited on the current annual recertification survey of 04/27/23. The duplicate citation during two federal surveys of record shows a pattern of the facility's inability to sustain an effective QAA program. The findings included: This tag was cross referenced to: During the annual recertification survey conducted on 04/27/23, the facility failed to monitor the cholesterol level for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications (Residents #7). F757: During the annual recertification survey conducted on 07/28/21, the facility failed to follow the parameter set by the physician to hold the diuretic as ordered for 1 of 5 sampled residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. An…

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

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • No harm found · B2023-04-27 · tag F0640 — pattern
    Encode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews with staff, the facility failed to complete and transmit the discharge Minimum Data Set (MDS) within 14 days of the discharge date for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for resident assessments (Resident #61 and #341). The findings included: 1. Resident #61 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident #61's medical record revealed the last completed Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment was an admission MDS dated [DATE]. There was no discharge assessment completed. Review of a nurse progress note revealed on 12/09/22 Resident #61 was discharged to his home. During an interview on 04/25/23 at 2:06 PM the MDS Coordinator revealed she was new to her position as of January 2023. She explained the facility recognized resident assessments were not being completed or scheduled in accordance with the regulations. The MDS Coordinator stated she would complete the discharge MDS assessment for Resident #61. During an interview on 04/27/23 at 4:55 PM the Administrator explained 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has plan 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.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • 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.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

$4,271 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $4,271 — penalty dated 2024-08-22

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.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
GIVENS ESTATES, INC.OrganizationDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/04/2025
HOKE, KRISTINEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/08/2022
KERESTES, DAVIDIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 12/08/2014

CMS files one row per role, so the 9 rows in the source record cover these 3 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.

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.

$21.1M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-3.1%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$2.1M
Related-party expense10% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 21%Medicare 15%Other / private 64%

This home reported $2.1M 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

$1,210per resident / day
operating cost
$36,789per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$1,174per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

Paying with Medicaid

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.

Typical monthly cost in North Carolina
$9,733/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$10,798/mo
Nursing home (private)
$6,496/mo
Assisted living

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 345078. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-08-15, 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.

What to do next