Glenbridge Health And Rehabilitation
211 Milton Brown Heirs Road, Boone, NC 28607 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 134 certified beds · (828) 264-6720 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0602), cited Feb 2025
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0565)
- inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
- a high number of inspection citations overall (41) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $32,349 in federal fines (most recent 2025-02-06)
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (61%) runs well above the national median (45%)
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 | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 2 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 | 2 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 2 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 2 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 4 to 1 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 | 18.0% | 15.6% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 3.6% | 7.2% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.4% | 0.7% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.8% | 2.3% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 27.1% | 5.9% | 6.5% | check this† — see note marked dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 2.7% | 3.5% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 16.5% | 18.3% | 16.1% | typical |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 24.7% | 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 | 5.6% | 5.5% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 22.9% | 20.7% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 24.1% | 14.0% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 3.0% | 1.4% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 95.9% | 78.1% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 21.9% | 22.9% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 14.1% | 12.9% | 12.0% | worse |
| 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 | 1.95 | 1.80 | 1.80 | typical |
† This value is several times the typical-state benchmark. It can be real, or it can be a coding artifact in what the facility submitted. 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.
56.8% 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 138 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 46.5% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 58 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 0.36 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 61% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 20% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 56.8%CMS range 47.7–64.5 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.9%CMS range 7.3–13.5 | 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 | 46.5% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 51.7% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 43.1% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 98.9% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 5.4% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 6.0%CMS range 3.4–9.7 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.01 | 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 134 beds and averages 107.1 residents a day — about 80% occupied, or roughly 27 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 3.53 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.553 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.22 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.10 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.70 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.67 to 0.27 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 61% 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 fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
41 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 30 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2025-02-06 · tag F0551 — isolatedGive the resident's representative the ability to exercise the resident's rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and staff, Legal Guardian, and former facility Executive Director interviews, the facility failed to exercise the rights of the Resident's Representative when Resident #115 had unsupervised visits with her son despite restricted visitation instructions from the Legal Guardian. The Legal Guardian stated, on Friday 1/24/2025, she informed the Admission's Director and the Resident Concierge Resident #115 was not to have visits from her son without supervision. Resident #115 was cognitively impaired, was adjudicated incompetent, and had history of sexual interactions with her son that included sexual intercourse, open mouth kissing, and inappropriate touching as witnessed by the previous facility's Executive Director. The Admission's Director left the Social Worker (SW) a note on Friday evening after the SW left for the day telling her to call Resident #115's Legal Guardian regarding visitation and concerns with Resident #115's son. The SW did not learn of the restricted…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-03-27 · tag F0565 — failed to support the resident council — patternHonor the resident's right to organize and participate in resident/family groups in the facility.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to resolve and communicate the facility's efforts to address concerns and/or suggestions voiced by residents during Resident Council meetings for 10 of 11 months reviewed (February 2025, March 2025, April 2025, May 2025, June 2025, July 2025, August 2025, October 2025, November 2025, and January 2026).Findings included:Review of the Resident Council Minutes for the period February 2025 through January 2026 revealed the following:a. The Resident Council Meeting minutes dated 02/20/25 revealed in part, the section for Old Business noted that showers were not being provided as often as residents would like, food was served late and cold or undercooked, beds were not being made, and residents clothing was not being taken to laundry to wash. The section for Pending Updates noted working with staff to make sure names are written in clothing so it is returned to the correct room with no further information documented. The section for New Business noted residents voiced concerns regarding medications being…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-03-27 · tag F0700 — patternTry different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
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 failed to implement an effective system to assess residents for the risk of entrapment from bed rails and monitor and document the ongoing need for bed rails. The facility also failed to maintain evidence that the risk and benefits of bed rails were discussed with the resident or resident representative and informed consent was obtained prior to the installation of bed rails for 4 of 4 sampled residents (Residents #11, #53, #61, and #75).Findings Included: a. Resident #11 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His cumulative diagnoses included heart failure, acute kidney failure, chronic atrial fibrillation (irregular heart rhythm), and diabetes.Resident #11's electronic medical record revealed a Siderail Data Collection assessment dated [DATE]. The assessment consisted of four subsections, Bed Mobility, Balance, Type of device, Summary, and included the following:Bed Mobility:Has the resident demonstrated poor bed mobility or…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-03-27 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — patternProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record reviews and interviews with staff, Nurse Practitioner, Pharmacy Director and Medical Director, the facility failed to have effective systems in place for acquiring a scheduled medication when nursing staff failed to request a prescription from the Nurse Practitioner to avoid a gap in medication administration when refilling a controlled medication which resulted in Resident #56 missing 4 days of the medication. This deficient practice occurred for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for pharmacy services (Resident #56).The findings included:Resident #56 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included diabetes mellitus and neuropathy (condition characterized by damage, disease, or dysfunction of one or more nerves, often causing pain, numbness, tingling, or muscle weakness).Review of Resident #56's physician orders revealed an order dated [DATE] for Lyrica (used to treat nerve pain from diabetes) 25 milligrams (mg) one capsule by mouth one time a day for neuropathy.Review of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-27 · tag F0552 — isolatedEnsure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
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 obtain consent and inform the resident or Responsible Party in advance of the risks and benefits of psychotropic medications prior to initiation for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications (Resident #4).The findings included:Resident #4 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Lewy Body Dementia (a progressive neurological disorder caused by abnormal protein deposits (Lewy bodies) in the brain, affecting thinking, movement, behavior, and mood).The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #4 had severe cognitive impairment. He displayed no behavioral symptoms and received antidepressant medications during the MDS assessment look-back period.Review of the December 2025 Medication Administration Record for Resident #4 revealed an active physician order dated 12/04/25 for risperidone (antipsychotic medication) 0.5 milligrams 1 tablet by mouth two times a day for mood…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-27 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — isolatedHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure a written grievance decision included all required components and to provide a written grievance decision to 1 of 1 resident reviewed for grievances (Resident #67). Findings included:Resident #67 was admitted to the facility on [DATE].A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #67 was cognitively intact.A grievance form dated 3/5/26 was completed by the Social Worker (SW) on behalf of Resident #67 and indicated Resident #67 had concerns regarding the attentiveness of night shift staff and not being changed during the night or check on every two hours. The form documented education was going to be provided by the Staff Development Coordinator (SDC). The form did not document the following: how the grievance was investigated, a summary of pertinent findings/conclusions regarding the resident's concern, a statement as to whether the grievance was confirmed or not confirmed, or the date the written…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-27 · tag F0645 — isolatedPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to submit a request for a Level II Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) evaluation for a resident with a serious mental health disorder for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for PASRR (Resident #81).Findings included:A PASRR Determination Notification letter dated 08/29/23 revealed Resident #81 had a Level I PASRR with no expiration date.A review of the North Carolina PASRR Level I screen dated 08/29/23 revealed that major depressive disorder and bipolar disorder were not documented on the North Carolina PASRR Level 1 screen.Resident #81 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included metabolic encephalopathy, vascular dementia, anxiety disorder, major depressive disorder, and bipolar disorder.The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #81 was not currently considered by the state Level II PASRR process to have a serious mental illness or intellectual disability. Resident #81's active…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-27 · 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 reviews, staff, resident, Pharmacy Consultant and Nurse Practitioner (NP) interviews, the facility failed to ensure medications were administered as prescribed by the physician when Nurse #4 administered Adderall (a central nervous system stimulant containing amphetamine and dextroamphetamine) to Resident #95 that was prescribed for Resident #59. In addition, Nurse #6 administered 100 milligrams (mg) of Lyrica (used to treat nerve pain from diabetes) to Resident #56 instead of the prescribed 50 mg Lyrica at bedtime. This deficient practice affected 2 of 3 residents reviewed for medication errors (Resident #59 and Resident #56).The findings included:1. Resident #59 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).Review of Resident #59's admission Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] revealed his cognition was moderately impaired.Review of Resident #59's physician orders dated 02/20/26 for Adderall XR (extended release) 10…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-27 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and resident, staff, Wound Physician Assistant (PA), Hospice, and Physician interviews, the facility failed to complete assessments for 3 of 3 residents reviewed for pressure ulcers (Resident #14, Resident #83, and Resident #48). In addition, the facility failed to initiate wound treatment for Resident # 14's pressure ulcer at the onset. Findings included: a. Resident #14 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His diagnoses included hemiplegia (paralysis or weakness on one side of the body) and hemiparesis (decreased control and strength on one side of the body) following unspecified cerebrovascular disease (stroke) affecting left non-dominant side.A care plan dated 10/30/25 and last revised on 2/2/26 indicated there was potential for pressure ulcer development related to contractures, limited mobility, and bed bound. The care plan goal was for Resident #14 pressure ulcer to show signs of healing and remain free from infection. The care plan interventions included…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-27 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record reviews and staff interviews, the facility failed to have a medication error rate of less than 5% as evidenced by 3 medication errors out of 26 opportunities, resulting in a medication error rate of 11.45% for 3 of 4 residents observed during the medication administration (Resident #1, Resident #81 and Resident #119).The findings included:1. Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included constipation.Review of Resident #1's physician order dated 01/06/26 for polyethylene glycol powder (laxative) give 17 grams by mouth one time a day for constipation.On 03/24/26 at 10:00 AM an observation was made of Nurse #1 during a medication administration. The Nurse prepared the 17 grams of polyethylene glycol powder by mixing it in a cup of water then took the medication to Resident #1's bedside and set the cup on the over bed table. Nurse #1 proceeded to give the Resident the medications from the medication cup then picked up a flavored liquid used to swallow…
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 · E2025-04-16 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — patternHave a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide Registered Nurse (RN) coverage for at least 8 consecutive hours for 6 of 53 days reviewed for staffing (2/15/2025, 3/2/2025, 3/15/2025, 3/16/2025, 3/29/2025, 3/30/2025). Findings included: On 4/1/2025 the Daily Posted Staffing sheet was observed in the front lobby of the facility, it was dated 3/30/2025 and indicated no Registered Nurse (RN) hours for 7am -7pm and 7pm-7a shift. Review of the daily schedule book revealed a calendar from March 2025 labeled RN coverage, which indicated on 2/15/2025, 3/1/2025, 3/2/2025, 3/15/2025, 3/16/2025, 3/29/2025, 3/30/2025 there was RN coverage. Review of daily staffing sheets and posted daily staffing records indicated on 2/15/2025, 3/1/2025,3/2/2025, 3/15/2025, 3/16/2025, 3/29/2025, 3/30/2025 there were no RNs listed on the daily staffing sheets, and no RN hours listed on the posted daily staffing sheets. On 4/2/25 at 3:30pm an interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) stated she was aware there should be 8 consecutive hours of RN coverage daily. The DON stated they…
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 30 citations
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-04-16 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations and staff interviews, the facility failed to remove expired food and failed to date perishable food stored for use in 1-of-1 walk-in cooler. This practice had the potential to affect food served to residents. The findings included: During the initial tour of the kitchen on 4/01/25 from 10:45 AM to 11:00 am an observation with the Assistant Dietary Supervisor of the walk-in cooler revealed the following: - a plastic container sealed with plastic wrap dated 3/28/2025 that was one quarter full of chicken breasts with seasoning dated 3/28/25 - a plastic container sealed with plastic wrap dated 3/27/2025 that was half full of chicken noodle soup that had started to separate - a plastic container sealed with plastic wrap dated 3/26/2025 that was half full of creamed corn - a metal tray of seven tuna salad sandwiches sealed with aluminum wrap with no date - a metal tray of 10 bologna sandwiches sealed with plastic wrap dated 3/27/2025 The Assistant Dietary Supervisor observed on 4/01/25 at 11:15 AM the food stored inside of the walk-in cooler that were expired 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 · D2025-04-16 · 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, Nurse Practitioner and staff interviews, the facility failed to notify the provider when five daily doses of Metoprolol Succinate ER (medication to treat heart failure) and Quetiapine Fumarate (an antipsychotic medication that helps regulate mood behaviors and thoughts) was not administered for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for notification (Resident #36). The findings included: Review of the hospital Discharge summary dated [DATE] revealed orders for Metoprolol Succinate 25 milligrams 24 hr tablet. Take 0.5 tablets (12.5 milligram total) by mouth nightly, and Quetiapine 25 milligram tablet. Take 1 tablet (25mg total) by mouth nightly. Resident #36 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included chronic systolic (congestive) heart failure, type 2 diabetes mellitus with diabetic peripheral angiopathy (the presence of diabetes which involves damage to the blood vessels particularly to the extremities), hypertensive heart disease with heart failure, unspecified dementia 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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-16 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
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, Pharmacist, Nurse Practitioner, and staff interviews, the facility failed to prevent a significant medication error when they failed to administer five daily doses of Metoprolol Succinate (medication to treat heart failure) and Quetiapine Fumarate (an antipsychotic medication that helps regulate mood behaviors and thoughts) for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for medications (Resident #36). The findings included: Review of the hospital Discharge summary dated [DATE] revealed orders for Metoprolol Succinate 25 milligrams 24 hr tablet. Take 0.5 tablets (12.5 milligram total) by mouth nightly, and Quetiapine 25 milligram tablet. Take 1 tablet (25mg total) by mouth nightly. Resident #36 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included chronic systolic (congestive) heart failure, type 2 diabetes mellitus with diabetic peripheral angiopathy (the presence of diabetes which involves damage to the blood vessels particularly to the extremities), hypertensive heart disease with heart…
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 before2025-02-06 · tag F0801 — widespreadEmploy sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, including a qualified dietician.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and staff interviews, the facility failed to employ a director of food and nutrition services that met the minimum qualifications, and it affected 106 of 109 residents. Findings included: On 01/27/2025 at 10:10 AM, the Dietary Manager was interviewed and revealed that he did not have any of the following: certification as a dietary manager or food manager, national certification for food service management and safety, an associate's or higher degree in food service management or in hospitality, 2 or more years of experience in the position of Director of Food and Nutrition Services in a nursing facility setting. The Dietary Manager stated that he does have a dietician that he can consult, but he did not know her name. He stated that he could call her if needed. He revealed that he had been at this facility in this kitchen for a total of six months and that he left for a while and then came back. On 01/28/2025 at 10:50 AM, a Dietary Manager at a sister facility was interviewed and stated that she was a Certified Dietary Manager and a Certified Food Protection…
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 before2025-02-06 · 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 observations and staff interviews, the facility failed to remove loose and unsecure pills of various shapes, sizes and colors and failed to ensure a medication cart was clean and free of debris for 2 of 3 medication carts reviewed for medication storage (100/200 split hall and 300 hall medication carts). The findings include: a. On 01/29/25 at 1:31 PM an observation was made of medication cart 100/200 hall split along with Nurse #2 which revealed 41 loose and unsecure pills of various shapes, sizes and colors and debris of paper shavings and rubber bands in the bottom of the cart drawers. An interview was conducted with Nurse #2 on 01/29/25 at 1:31 PM who explained that everyone was responsible for keeping the medication carts clean and orderly. The Nurse stated she should have vacuumed the medication cart out prior to the observation. During an interview with Unit Manager (UM) #1 on 01/29/25 at 1:42 PM she explained that the condition of the medication cart was unacceptable and that it was the nurses' responsibility to vacuum the medication carts out once a week. b. An…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-02-06 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
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 resident, visitor and staff interviews and test tray, the facility failed to provide food that was appetizing in temperature, texture and palatability for 3 of 3 residents sampled for food palatability (Resident #59, Resident # 15, and Resident # 57). The findings included: a. Resident #59 was admitted on [DATE]. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed that Resident #59 was cognitively intact. An interview with Resident #59 occurred on 01/27/2025 at 1:05 PM he stated the food was terrible. They don't give us much breakfast. This morning the eggs were runny and cold. There was no meat. The bread was hard. He said he knew that he could have asked for something different, but he knew it would take a long time and wouldn't be much good either. He stated that he tries to keep a few snacks in his drawer, and the nutrition room never had anything. During an interview with Resident #59 on 01/29/2025 at 5:28 PM, he stated regarding lunch hate them chicken…
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 before2025-02-06 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations and staff interviews, the facility failed to store food items off the floor in the dry goods storage area, remove food items with signs of spoilage stored for use in 1 of 2 walk-in freezers and failed to ensure ice cream stored for use in an upright freezer did not have signs of freezer burn in 1 of 3 nourishment rooms (100 Hall nourishment room). The practices had the potential to affect food served to residents. The findings included: a. An observation on 01/27/2025 at 10:02 AM of the dry goods storage room revealed a mesh bag of onions and a wrapped package of water bottles sitting on the storeroom floor. They were pointed out to the Dietary Manager who stated that they should not be on the floor. An item with a split plastic bag on it on the storeroom floor was pointed out, and the Dietary Manager said that it was an old mixer and didn't need to be on the floor. b. Observations of the freezer shelves on 01/27/2025 at 10:07 AM revealed an expired bag of iceberg lettuce dated 01/21, a container of lettuce covered in plastic wrap with a date of 1/23 that…
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 before2025-02-06 · 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 and Resident interviews, the facility failed to treat a dependent resident in a dignified manner when Nurse Aide (NA) #2 failed to change Resident #39's soiled brief upon request of the Resident before she ate her lunch meal for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for dignity and respect (Resident #39). Resident #39 stated she felt belittled and treated like a child. The findings included: Resident #39 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #39's cognition was severely impaired, and the Resident was dependent (helper does all the effort) for toileting. The MDS indicated Resident #39 was always incontinent of bladder and bowel. On 01/27/25 at 2:20 PM during an observation and interview with Resident #39 the Resident was lying in bed on her back. The Resident explained that she could not go to the bathroom by herself and that she wore a brief which had to be changed by the staff. Resident #39…
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 before2025-02-06 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to maintain the bed remote in good repair for 1 of 21 rooms on 200 hall (room [ROOM NUMBER]-B) reviewed for environment. The findings included: On 01/27/25 at 11:40 AM an observation of room [ROOM NUMBER] revealed bed B was raised approximately waist high and the bed remote was attached to the right-side rail. The coiled cord to the bed remote was missing approximately 8 inches of the rubbery outside covering exposing the wire inside the cord. The bed was occupied by a resident during the observation. On 01/27/25 at 3:10 PM an observation was made of the bed which was in low position. The Resident was not in the bed and the bed remote was attached to the right-side rail and remained unchanged. An observation was made of the bed remote in room [ROOM NUMBER]-B on 01/28/25 at 1:45 PM which remained unchanged. On 01/28/25 at 3:49 PM an interview was conducted with Nurse Aide (NA) #1 who explained the resident in bed 205-B was not able 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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-06 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolatedProtect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and staff and Consultant Pharmacist interviews, the facility failed to protect a resident's right to be free of misappropriation of controlled medications for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for misappropriation (Resident #28). The findings included: Resident #28 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed that Resident #28 was cognitively intact and received as needed pain medication during the assessment reference period. A physician order dated 08/05/24 read Oxycodone/Acetaminophen (controlled pain medication) 10/325 milligrams (mg) by mouth every 6 hours as needed. Review of a facility reported incident dated 09/11/24 read in part, it was brought to the attention of the facility that a card of narcotics was unaccounted for. The accused employee was listed as Medication Aide #1. The report was signed by the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON). Medication Aide #2 was interviewed on 01/29/25 at 10:06 AM. She stated…
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 · D2025-02-06 · 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 2. Resident #92 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included alcoholic cirrhosis of liver, chronic kidney disease, heart failure, and protein-calorie malnutrition. A review of Resident #92's weights were as follows: 7/18/2024- 191.6 pounds (lbs.) 8/13/2024- 183.0 lbs. 9/13/2024- 157.6 lbs. Review of Resident #92's most recent nutritional assessment dated [DATE] revealed the following statement: significant weight loss noted at 30 days, at 90 days, and at 180 days with weight trending down since admission. A review of Resident #92's quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] revealed him to be cognitively impaired. He was coded as not having had any significant weight loss. Review of Resident #92's weights at the time the Minimum Data Set assessment was completed revealed he had a 16.04% weight loss from 7/2024 to 9/2024. During an interview with MDS Nurse on 01/30/25 at 4:02 PM he acknowledged that Resident #92's quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment from 12/21/24 was inaccurate…
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 · D2025-02-06 · 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 request a Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) Level II evaluation for a resident with a new mental health diagnosis for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for PASARR (Resident #23). The findings include: A Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) Level I evaluation was completed at the time of admission on [DATE] for Resident #23. Resident #23 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses, in part, of Type 2 diabetes mellitus, vascular dementia, and cognitive communication disorder. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed that Resident #23 was cognitively intact. The Psychiatric Nurse Practitioner (NP) evaluated Resident #23 on 11/25/2024, 12/05/2024 and 12/20/24 and diagnosed her with depression. The NP continued the medication regimen of Doxepin (an antidepressant) and trazodone (an antidepressant), On 01/24/2025 the NP diagnosed Resident #23 with major depressive disorder and psychosis…
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 · D2025-02-06 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record reviews, and staff interviews, the facility failed to develop a person-centered comprehensive care plan that reflected the need for supervised visitation for 1 of 22 residents reviewed for care plans (Resident #4). The findings included: Resident #4 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #4 was moderately cognitively impaired with no behaviors. Review of Resident #4's care plans revealed none that addressed supervised visits with a family member. Supervised Visits documentation for Resident #4 revealed the family member had visited on 12/17/2024 at 1:00 pm with supervision for approximately 1 hour. Resident #4 had supervised visits on 1/14/2025 at 12:00 pm, 1/27/2025 at 1:00 pm, and on 2/4/2025 at 12:00 pm with her family member. An interview was conducted on 1/30/2025 at 9:59 am with the Social Worker (SW). The SW stated Resident #4 was placed on supervised visitation after Resident #4's family member was found…
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 before2025-02-06 · 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 reviews and staff, Resident Representative and Nurse Practitioner interviews, the facility failed to implement a treatment for an area of skin impairment for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #181) reviewed for pressure ulcers. The findings included: Resident #161 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included end stage renal disease (ESRD) requiring hemodialysis, diabetes mellitus, severe protein calorie malnutrition, dysphagia (difficulty swallowing) and cerebral infarction. Resident #161 discharged to the hospital on [DATE]. A review of Resident #161's care plan dated 05/16/24 indicated the Resident was at risk of pressure ulcers related to severe malnutrition, hemodialysis, impaired mobility due to cerebral vascular accident and dysphagia. The interventions included: follow the facility's policy regarding preventing/treating skin breakdown, informing caregivers of any new skin breakdown and monitor/document/report any changes in skin status to include appearance, color, would…
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 · D2025-02-06 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record reviews, and resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide incontinence care to a resident upon request (Resident #39) and failed to shave a dependent resident (Resident #27) for 2 of 5 dependent residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL). The findings included: 1. Resident #39 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included cerebral vascular accident (CVA) and atrial fibrillation. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #39's cognition was severely impaired, and the Resident was dependent (helper does all the effort) for toileting. The MDS indicated Resident #39 was always incontinent of bladder and bowel. A review of Resident #39's care plan dated 10/29/24 revealed the Resident had bladder and bowel incontinence related to CVAs, history of urinary tract infections and impaired mobility. The goal was that the risk for urinary tract infections will be minimized/prevented through utilizing…
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 before2025-02-06 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide a physician ordered treatment for a resident (Resident #36) with a stage 2 (open sore or ruptured blister) pressure ulcer. The deficit practice was identified for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #36) reviewed for pressure ulcers. The findings included: Resident #36 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. An annual minimum data set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #36 was severely cognitively impaired with no behaviors or rejections of care. There was no pressure ulcers coded for Resident #36. A wound care note dated 1/24/2025, authored by the Wound Care Nurse, revealed Resident #36's high risk area to sacrum (area near the lower back/pelvis) was now a stage 2 (open sore or ruptured blister) pressure injury. There was not a cushion noted in Resident #36's wheelchair on 1/23/2025 when wound care was provided. Therapy provided a high-density foam cushion, and an air mattress overlay was placed on Resident #36's bed for…
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 before2025-02-06 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to secure an oxygen cylinder stored in a resident's bathroom and failed to ensure an oxygen vent was free from dust and debris for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for respiratory care (Resident #19 and #1). The findings included: 1. Resident #19 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included hypoxia (low oxygen saturation). A review of Resident #19's physician orders revealed an order dated 04/29/24 for supplemental oxygen at 2 liters per minute continuous for hypoxia. A review of Resident #19's care plan revised 09/18/24 revealed the need for oxygen related to hypoxia with the goal of having no signs or symptoms of poor oxygenation. The interventions included monitoring for signs and symptoms of respiratory distress and providing supplemental oxygen at the prescribed rate. Resident #19's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed her cognition was severely impaired and she had supplemental oxygen. On…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-06 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure accurate medical records when a resident's sacral dressing was incorrectly documented as applied for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #36) reviewed for medical record accuracy. The findings included: Resident #36 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A wound care note dated 1/24/2025, authored by the Wound Care Nurse, revealed Resident #36's high risk area to sacrum (area near the lower back/pelvis) was now a stage 2 (open sore or ruptured blister) pressure injury. A physician's order dated 1/24/2025 revealed Resident #36 was ordered to have a foam dressing applied to her sacrum, placement checked daily, and dressing to be changed every 3 days or as needed. Review of the January 2025 Treatment Administration Record (TAR) revealed the Wound Care Nurse had documented Resident #36's foam dressing to sacrum as completed for dayshift on 1/29/2025. An observation was conducted on 1/29/2025 at 5:32 pm of Nurse #3 and Nurse Aide (NA)…
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 before2023-12-13 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations and staff interviews the facility failed to ensure bread was dated and not stored for use after the use by date in the dry storage area. This deficient practice had the potential to affect the food served to the residents. The findings included: During an observation of the dry storage area on 12/12/23 at 3:30 PM along with the Dietary Director the observation yielded 3 packs of 12 hotdog buns with a date of 12/10/23 and 3 packs of 12 hamburger buns that had no date printed on the packages. An interview was conducted with the Dietary Director at 3:40 PM on 12/12/23 who explained the hotdog buns should have been pulled from the shelves on the expiration date printed on the packages and there should have been a clarification date for the expiration date for the hamburger buns. The hamburger buns should not be used unless there was a known expiration date. During an interview with the Dietary Manager on 12/12/23 at 4:15 PM the Manager explained that he tried to check the expiration dates on the breads about every day and he missed the dates because 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 · E2023-12-13 · 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 reviews and interviews the facility's Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) Committee failed to maintain implemented procedures and monitor interventions the committee put into place following a recertification and complaint survey dated 10/05/23. This was for two repeat deficiencies that were cited in the areas of F-804: Nutritive Value/Appearance/Palatable/Preferred Temp, and F-812: Food Procurement/Storage/Preparation/Serve/Sanitary that were originally cited during the recertification and complaint survey dated 10/05/23. The continued failure of the facility during 2 federal surveys of record shows a pattern of the facility's inability to sustain an effective QAA program. The findings included: This tag is crossed referenced to: F-804 Based on observations, record review, test trays, staff and resident interviews, the facility failed to provide meals that were palatable and appetizing in temperature and appearance for 2 meals served to 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1). The practice had the potential to affect other residents receiving meals from the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-12-13 · 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 reviews, staff and resident interviews the facility failed to treat residents in a dignified manner when they served the resident's supper meals in Styrofoam containers for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for dignity (Resident #2 and Resident #3). The findings included: 1. Resident #2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #2's cognition was moderately impaired. On 12/12/23 at 5:30 PM during an observation of the supper meal tray line in process of plating the food, [NAME] #1 obtained 7 black Styrofoam containers to utilize for the residents' meals to complete the plating process. An interview conducted with [NAME] #1 on 12/12/23 at 5:30 PM who explained that they often had to use the containers because they did not have enough plate covers to use for the meals. The [NAME] continued to explain that they normally had enough for breakfast but throughout the day they had to resort to the containers because for…
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 before2023-12-13 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — isolatedEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
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, test trays, staff and resident interviews, the facility failed to provide meals that were palatable and appetizing in temperature and appearance for 2 meals served to 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1). The practice had the potential to affect other residents receiving meals from the kitchen. The findings included: Resident #1 was admitted to the facility 01/02/23. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #1 had moderately intact cognition. a. An observation and interview were conducted with Resident #1 on 12/12/23 at 11:00 AM. The Resident explained that the food was not good but some days it was better than others. The meat, especially chicken, was overcooked and tough and the pasta was not good. She stated the broccoli was always so overcooked and mushy that she informed the kitchen not to bring her broccoli anymore with her meals. The lunch meal served on 12/12/23 was roasted chicken thigh, mashed sweet potatoes, lima beans and pears. 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 · Fcited before2023-10-05 · tag F0801 — widespreadEmploy sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, including a qualified dietician.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interviews the facility failed to employ a qualified director of food and nutrition services with the competencies and skills required to carry out food and nutrition services for 88 of 88 residents. The findings included: An interview was conducted with the Dietary Manager on 10/04/23 at 12:04 PM and revealed that he had been employed by the facility for three months and was appointed the Dietary Manager position at the end of August 2023. He stated that the facility had sent him to a sister facility for three days for some training, but he had not gone through the certified dietary manager class and had no education in food and nutrition. The dietary manager stated that prior to working at the facility he worked in retail and again confirmed he had no educational training in food and nutrition. He added that the plan was to get him through the certified dietary manager program as well as serve safe certification but due to the staffing challenges in the dietary department he had been unable to attend either of those classes. The Registered Dietician (RD) was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2023-10-05 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and staff interviews the facility failed to maintain the final rinse cycle of the high temperature dish machine according to manufacturer's recommendations, failed to remove expired food items from the dry goods storage area, failed to maintain a clean floor free from grease build-up and clean vent on the reach-in cooler and failed to keep the food preparation area free of chemicals and personal drinks. In addition, the facility failed to maintain the walk-in freezer free of ice build-up and failed to discard frozen food with signs of freezer burn. The facility also failed to ensure dietary staff wore hair coverings in the food preparation area. This deficient practice had the potential to affect the food served to residents. The facility census was 88 residents. The findings included: 1. The manufacturer recommendations for the high temperature dish machine read in part, operating temperature for high temperature sanitizing rinse cycle was 180 degrees Fahrenheit (F). An…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-10-05 · 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 observations and staff interviews the facility failed to remove expired medications from 3 of 5 medications carts and 1 of 2 medication rooms observed for medication storage. The findings included: 1a. An observation of the 100/200 hall split medication cart was conducted on 10/03/23 at 10:58 AM along with Nurse #2. The observation revealed the following expired medications were on the cart and available for use: Aspart Insulin flex pen that was opened on 04/27/23 and Levothyroxine (used to treat thyroid issues) 88 micrograms (mcg) open bottle of 90 tablets that expired on 07/31/23. Nurse #2 was interviewed on 10/03/23 at 11:14 AM and confirmed that she was responsible for the 100/200 split medication cart. She stated that the insulin had been discontinued on 05/04/23 and just never pulled off the medication cart. Nurse #2 explained that the pharmacy had just been at the facility and gone through the medication cart and Nurse #2 thought the Unit Managers also went through the medication carts, but she could not say for sure. Nurse #2 added that she had gone through 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 · Ecited before2023-10-05 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
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, test tray, and resident and staff interviews the facility failed to provide palatable food that was appetizing in appearance and temperature for 4 of 6 residents reviewed with food concerns (Resident #3, Resident #8, Resident #18, and Resident #76). The findings included: 1a. Resident #3 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included congestive heart failure. Review of the most recent quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed that Resident #3 was moderately cognitively impaired and required supervision with eating. An observation and interview were conducted with Resident #3 on 10/04/23 at 2:43 PM. Resident #3 lunch tray sat in front of her with approximately 25% of the meal gone. Resident #3 stated that she had eaten what she could eat because the chicken alfredo was cold and dry and had one small piece of chicken in it and the asparagus was also cold. She did say that she was able to eat the top portion of the asparagus stalks but that was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-10-05 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolatedHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
What the surveyor found here — 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 and resident interviews the facility failed to provide a dependent resident with his choice of showers for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #145) reviewed for providing assistance with activities of daily living. The finding included: Resident #145 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included heart failure and diabetes mellitus. A review of the nursing admission assessment dated [DATE] revealed that Resident #145 was alert. A review of the facility's shower schedule indicated Resident #145 was scheduled to receive showers on Tuesday and Friday on evening shift. A review of Resident #145's shower/bathing record since his admission on [DATE] revealed documentation of morning and evening wash ups and two occasions of bed baths given. There were no showers documented for Resident #145. During an interview and observation of Resident #145 on 10/02/23 at 2:14 PM the Resident was sitting in his wheelchair at his bedside. He was dressed in street clothes…
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 before2023-10-05 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record reviews and interviews the facility failed to post cautionary and safety signs that indicated the use of oxygen for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for respiratory care (Resident #46 and #145). Findings included: 1. Resident #46 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis that included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and respiratory failure. A review of Resident #46's physician order dated 05/19/23 indicated oxygen at 2 liters continuously by nasal cannula. The quarterly Minimum Data assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #46 was cognitively intact and used supplemental oxygen. On 10/02/23 at 12:33 PM an observation was made of Resident #46 wearing oxygen via nasal cannula at 3 liters per minute. There was no warning sign posted on the outside of the door or door frame to indicate oxygen was in use. A subsequent observation on 10/03/23 at 9:43 AM revealed Resident #46 wore oxygen via nasal cannula at 2 liters per minute. There was no warning sign posted on the outside…
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 before2026-03-27 · 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
Based on observations and staff interviews, the facility failed to maintain a clean and orderly interior as evidenced by hall floors being dirty with multiple areas of stains, dirt, debris, and dried fluid/water spots. This was observed on 2 of 6 hallways reviewed for environment (front common area hallway and rear common area hallway).Findings included:A. An observation made on 03/23/26 at 9:40 AM of the facility's front common hallway floor which was located between two resident wings revealed multiple areas that contained stains, dirt, debris, and multiple dried fluid/water spots too numerous to count. The floor appeared to have dirt and debris pushed into the corners of the walls. There was also observed dirt and debris pushed into corners, in a small alcove, underneath a water fountain. Observations were also made of residents, visitors, and staff utilizing this hallway as a pass through to resident rooms.An additional observation of the facility's front common hallway floor was completed on 03/27/26 at 8:15 AM revealed the floor to remain in the same condition as earlier in…
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 · Ccited before2025-04-16 · tag F0801 — widespreadEmploy sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, including a qualified dietician.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interviews, the facility failed to employ a director of food and nutrition services that met the minimum qualifications, and it affected 108 of 111 residents. Findings included: On 04/01/2025 at 11:00 AM, the Assistant Dietary Supervisor was interviewed and revealed that he did not have any of the following: certification as a dietary manager or food manager, national certification for food service management and safety, an associate's or higher degree in food service management or in hospitality, 2 or more years of experience in the position of Director of Food and Nutrition Services in a nursing facility setting. The Assistant Dietary Supervisor stated that he did have a dietician that he could consult and call if needed. He revealed that he had been at this facility in this kitchen for a little over six months and that he left for a while and then came back. On 04/01/2025 at 11:56 AM, an interim Dietary Manager at a sister facility was interviewed and stated that she was a Certified Dietary Manager and a Certified Food Protection Professional. She stated that she…
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
$32,349 in federal fines across 3 penalties. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.
- $13,449 — penalty dated 2025-02-06
- $13,703 — penalty dated 2025-02-06
- $5,197 — penalty dated 2023-10-05
- Medicare payment denial — starting 2025-03-07 for 56 days
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to BRIGHTON HEALTHCARE — 8 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 | 1 of 5 | 1.5 | -0.5 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 1 of 5 | 1.8 | -0.8 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 1.9 | -0.9 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 2 of 5 | 1.6 | +0.4 vs chain |
The other 7 homes this chain runs (chain average 1.5★, 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GLENBRIDGE HEALTH AND REHABILITATION | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 12/01/2022 |
| FISCHER, DAVID | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2022 |
| LEFKOWITZ, ZEV | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2022 |
| JONES, KRISTY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2022 |
| BRAND SONNENSCHINE LLP | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2022 |
| BRIGHTON MANAGEMENT ONE LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2022 |
| FORVIS MAZARS LLP | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2022 |
| LTC CONSULTING SERVICES LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2022 |
| TURBETT, TIMOTHY | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2022 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 14 rows in the source record cover these 9 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
5 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $584K 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 2024. 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, FY2024). 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 345163. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-03-27, 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.