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

The Greens at Cabarrus

250 Bishop Lane, Concord, NC 28025 · For profit - Corporation · 90 certified beds · (704) 788-6400 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (704) 788-6400 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 5 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

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

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
Worth asking about
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)

One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.

A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.

5/5
CMS overall
5 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 2 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 5 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★ 4/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
270 Copperfield Blvd NE #102 · (704) 786-6521 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
270 Copperfield Blvd NE · (704) 784-9613 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
Food Lion0.5 mi
349 Copperfield Blvd NE · (704) 785-8592 · Call to confirm hours
Park
2323 Concord Lake Rd · (704) 920-2700 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
2315 Concord Lake Rd · (704) 786-3510

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 5 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 5 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 4 to 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating5★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased12.4%15.6%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight12.7%7.2%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.7%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection1.4%2.3%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms2.6%5.9%6.5%better
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.0%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury1.4%3.5%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened22.7%18.3%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication28.4%21.3%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%94.1%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers0.4%5.5%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control27.4%20.7%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table6.7%14.0%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%1.4%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine92.1%78.1%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission25.2%22.9%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit5.3%12.9%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.151.781.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.281.801.80better

On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.

§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.

CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

66.0% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 219 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

66.0%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.6%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
65.5%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.42U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.21hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.16hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.05hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 65.5% 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 113 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 0.42 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 71% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 36% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF66.0%CMS range 58.9–72.851.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.6%CMS range 7.7–13.810.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge65.5%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge68.1%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge45.1%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting66.7%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 discharge97.7%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.7%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization6.4%CMS range 3.8–10.47.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.911.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

0.51
RN hours/ resident / day
0.85
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.69
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.05
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.40
RN hoursweekends
51.4%
Total nursing turnover
30.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 90 beds and averages 84.8 residents a day — about 94% occupied, or roughly 5 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.05 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.51 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.69 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.59 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.23 on weekdays — 20% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.56 to 0.40 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 51% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.

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

Inspection trend

1
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-07-24)
0
at the previous standard inspection (2024-05-23)

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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

  • Potential for harm · D2025-11-14 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, and Nurse Practitioner (NP) and staff interviews, the facility failed to write an order to resume warfarin (an anticoagulant medication used to thin blood after a stroke) after laboratory results were received which resulted in a resident missing 3 consecutive doses of warfarin. This was for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for professional standards (Resident #1).The findings included: Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including stroke, left-sided hemiplegia (paralysis on one side of the body) and heart disease. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] documented Resident #1 was cognitively intact. The MDS documented Resident #1 was taking anticoagulant medications. A care plan dated 10/30/25 addressed Resident #1's use of anticoagulant medication with interventions including administering the anticoagulant medications as ordered and observe for adverse reactions including bruising, blood in the urine or stool, or changes in vital signs.…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-07-24 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolated
    Provide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
    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 representative, staff, dialysis staff, and manager of the transport company interviews, the facility failed to send a lift pad with the resident causing the resident to miss their dialysis appointment for 1 of 3 resident reviewed for dialysis (Resident #32). Findings included:Resident #32 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included muscle weakness, diabetes, and dependence on renal dialysis.Review of Resident #32's initial nursing assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #34 was alert and oriented and required extensive assistance with one person staff for transfers.Review of Resident #32's Kardex (quick reference tool that summarizes essential patient information for nurses) dated 07/18/25 revealed the resident was supposed to have a lift pad under her on dialysis days Monday, Wednesday, and Fridays and was a lift transfer on dialysis days only. Review of Resident #32's physician orders dated 07/18/25 revealed the resident was ordered to have a lift pad…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-02-09 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to keep nutritional supplements cold that required refrigeration in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions for 2 of 2 supplements on 1 of 2 medication carts (300 hall). The facility also failed to date a multiple use medication bottle when opened or check the medication expiration date for 1 of 10 medication bottles on 1 of 2 medication carts (400 hall). In addition, the facility failed to date insulin pens when opened for 5 of 8 insulin pens on 2 of 2 medication carts (300 and 400 hall). Findings included: The medication cart for the 400 hall was checked with Nurse #2 on [DATE] at 3:05 PM. The following opened and undated medications were noted on the medication cart: -A 30-ounce bottle of a multiple patient use protein supplement used to promote wound healing was noted to be opened, without an open date and to have expired [DATE]. Manufacturer instructions were to date the bottle when opened and discard 3 months after…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-02-09 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolated
    Ensure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
    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 interview the facility failed to store a tube feeding syringe with the plunger separated from the plunger for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #60) reviewed for enteral feeding management, which created a potential for bacterial growth. Findings included: Resident #60 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of seizure disorder and heart disease. A Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #60 was severely cognitively impaired and she received enteral feedings for nutrition. During an observation of Resident #60 on 2/7/2023 at 4:43 pm she was in bed with enteral feeding being administered by an enteral feeding pump. The enteral feeding pump stand had an enteral feeding syringe hanging in a plastic bag. The enteral feeding syringe was stored with the plunger in the syringe and there was clear fluid in the tip of the plunger. During an observation and interview with Nurse #1 at 2/7/2023 at 6:01 pm Resident #60 continued…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-02-09 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — isolated
    Set up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and staff interviews and observations, the facility's Quality Assurance and Performance committee (QAPI) failed to maintain implemented procedures and monitor the interventions put into place during a recertification survey dated 5/13/2021 (F693) and on the current recertification/ complaint survey on 2/9/2023. The continued failure of the facility during two federal surveys of record showed a pattern of the facility's inability to sustain an effective Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement Program. Findings included: This tag is cross referenced to: F693 - Based on observation, record review and staff interview the facility failed to store a tube feeding syringe with the plunger separated from the barrel for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #60) reviewed for enteral feeding management, which created a potential for bacterial growth. During the recertification survey of 5/13/2021,the facility failed to store a tube feeding syringe barrel and syringe plunger separately after use and rinsing which created the potential for bacterial growth. An interview 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.

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to CCH HEALTHCARE — 33 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 →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 5 of 52.5+2.5 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 52.4+1.6 vs chain
Staffing 2 of 52.5-0.5 vs chain
Quality measures 5 of 53.9+1.1 vs chain
The other 32 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.5★, per CMS)
1 of 5Carver Living CenterDurham, NC 1 of 5Countryside Manor Nursing And Rehabilitation LLCFremont, OH 1 of 5Harrison Pavilion Care CenterCincinnati, OH 1 of 5Meadowbrook Care CenterCincinnati, OH 1 of 5Smoky Mountain Health And Rehabilitation CenterPigeon Forge, TN 1 of 5The Greens at GastoniaGastonia, NC 1 of 5Valley Nursing and Rehabilitation CenterTaylorsville, NC 1 of 5Weakley Rehabilitation And Nursing CenterDresden, TN 2 of 5Cedars Of Lebanon Care CenterLebanon, OH 2 of 5Clovernook Health Care And Rehabilitation CenterCincinnati, OH 2 of 5Louisville Gardens Care CenterLouisville, OH 2 of 5Ridgewood Living & Rehabilitation CenterWashington, NC 2 of 5Solon Pointe At Emerald RidgeSolon, OH 2 of 5The Greens at HickoryHickory, NC 2 of 5The Greens at LincolntonLincolnton, NC 2 of 5The Greens at ViewmontHickory, NC 2 of 5Willow Ridge Of NCRutherfordton, NC 3 of 5Flint Ridge Nrsg & Rehab CtrNewark, OH 3 of 5Lincoln Crawford Care CenterCincinnati, OH 3 of 5Meadow Wind Health Care CenterMassillon, OH 3 of 5Northcrest Rehab And Nursing CenterNapoleon, OH 3 of 5Pineville Rehabilitation and Living CenterPineville, NC 3 of 5Scarlet Oaks Nursing And Rehabilitation CenterCincinnati, OH 3 of 5The Greens at HendersonvilleHendersonville, NC 3 of 5The Greens at Pinehurst Rehabilitation & Living CePinehurst, NC 3 of 5The Greens at Spruce PinesSpruce Pine, NC 4 of 5Cedarview Care CenterLebanon, OH 4 of 5Sunrise Nursing Healthcare LLCAmelia, OH 4 of 5The Greens at Maple LeafStatesville, NC 4 of 5The Greens at WeavervilleWeaverville, NC 4 of 5Twilight Gardens Nursing And RehabilitationNorwalk, OH 5 of 5Locust Ridge Healthcare LLCWilliamsburg, OH

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 / managerTypeRoleShareSince
BYNC HOLDINGS LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 07/01/2022
STARLIGHT HEALTHCARE LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST50%since 07/01/2022
PITTMAN, CYNTHIAIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 07/01/2022
JEREMIAS, BARUCHIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 07/01/2022
STERN, JACOBIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 07/01/2022

CMS files one row per role, so the 6 rows in the source record cover these 5 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

2 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.

$12.1M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+12.7%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.3M
Related-party expense13% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 56%Medicare 13%Other / private 31%

This home reported $1.3M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 13% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

$350per resident / day
operating cost
$10,633per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$401per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in NC

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the North Carolina Medicaid page.

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

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 345362. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-07-24, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next