PruittHealth-Durham
3100 Erwin Road, Durham, NC 27705 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 125 certified beds · (919) 383-1546 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Jun 2025
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0565)
- it has 6 actual-harm citations
- a high number of inspection citations overall (49) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $34,632 in federal fines (most recent 2025-06-13)
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
- about 22% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 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 improved from 1 to 2 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 | 9.2% | 15.6% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 11.2% | 7.2% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 1.2% | 0.7% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.6% | 2.3% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 5.9% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 2.0% | 3.5% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 15.6% | 18.3% | 16.1% | typical |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 12.8% | 21.3% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 86.7% | 94.1% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.6% | 5.5% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 20.7% | 20.7% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 11.3% | 14.0% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.2% | 1.4% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 93.9% | 78.1% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 19.7% | 22.9% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 11.0% | 12.9% | 12.0% | typical |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.02 | 1.78 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 2.46 | 1.80 | 1.80 | worse |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
45.6% 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 58 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 25.0% 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 28 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 0.29 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 44% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 11% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| 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 | 45.6%CMS range 31.0–63.2 | 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 | 11.1%CMS range 7.6–15.5 | 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 | 25.0% | 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 | 28.6% | 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 | 32.1% | 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 | 97.3% | 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 90.0% | 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 | 0.0% | 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 | 7.3%CMS range 3.7–13.2 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.94 | 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 125 beds and averages 111.3 residents a day — about 89% occupied, or roughly 14 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 3.36 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.73 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.00 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 2.88 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.56 on weekdays — 19% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.78 to 0.61 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 43% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
49 citations, most serious first. The 16 most serious are shown; the remaining 33 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · G2026-06-12 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolatedKeep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to maintain personal privacy and dignity for 3 of 5 residents reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to ensure privacy when a Resident #17 was left naked with his genitals exposed and visible to the public. Resident #17 stated he felt angry, embarrassed, and as though he was on display as a result of the incident. The facility also failed to treat Resident #57 in a dignified manner when staff did not provide privacy during activities of daily living, exposing Resident #57's buttocks and private areas during bathing and wound care. Additionally, the facility failed to protect the dignity and privacy of Resident #80 by failing to provide a privacy cover while Resident #80 was dressed only in an adult incontinence brief and visible to the public. These failures resulted in residents experiencing embarrassment, loss of dignity, and compromised privacy. Findings Included: 1. Resident #17 was admitted to the facility 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.
- Actual harm · G2026-06-12 · 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 record review, observations, staff and provider interviews, the facility failed to ensure 1 of 5 residents (Resident # 17) received ongoing assessments of a stage 4 pressure ulcer. The facility failed to recognize the pressure ulcer was not improving and involve a wound provider. On admission, 4/20/26, the wound measurements were 2.5 centimeters (cm) in length, 1.5 cm in width, and 0.5 cm in depth. When the wound provider assessed the pressure ulcer on 5/21/26 the wound measured 10 cm in length, 2.5 cm in width, and 1 cm in depth.Findings Included: Review of the hospital Discharge summary dated [DATE] revealed Resident #17 was discharged to the facility with multiple wound care needs, including a former enterocutaneous fistula site (an abnormal opening connecting the intestine to the skin) requiring daily wound care, wounds to the groin, perineum, and thighs requiring treatment, a left ischial wound requiring ongoing dressing changes, and pressure injury prevention interventions.Review of the hospital…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Actual harm · G2026-06-12 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — isolatedProvide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, observations, staff and provider interviews, the facility failed to ensure adequate staffing to ensure 1 of 5 residents (Resident # 17) received ongoing assessments of a stage 4 pressure ulcer and were able to recognize the pressure ulcer was not improving and involve a wound provider. On admission, 4/20/26, the wound measurements were 2.5 centimeters (cm) in length, 1.5 cm in width, and 0.5 cm in depth. When the wound provider assessed the pressure ulcer on 5/21/26 the wound measured 10 cm in length, 2.5 cm in width, and 1 cm in depth.Cross refer to F686 Based on record review, observations, staff and provider interviews, the facility failed to ensure 1 of 5 residents (Resident # 17) received ongoing assessments of a stage 4 pressure ulcer. The facility failed to recognize the pressure ulcer was not improving and involve a wound provider. On admission, 4/20/26, the wound measurements were 2.5 centimeters (cm) in length, 1.5 cm in width, and 0.5 cm in depth. When the wound provider assessed the pressure ulcer on 5/21/26 the wound measured 10 cm in length, 2.5…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Actual harm · G2025-06-13 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, and staff, responsible party (RP), Hospice Nurse, and Physician interviews, the facility failed to notify the provider of a change in condition and x-ray results after a fall for one (Resident #1) of three residents reviewed for notification of falls. Resident #1 fell on 5/17/2025 and the facility failed to notify the provider of pain and a new inability to bear weight. X-ray results obtained midday on 5/19/2025 were not relayed to the on-call provider until after hours on 5/19/2025. Resident #1 sustained an acute impacted left femoral neck fracture (an acute impacted left femoral neck fracture is a break in the upper part of the thigh bone (femur), specifically at the neck, where it connects to the ball of the hip joint). Findings included: Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of history of cerebral vascular accident, hemiplegia, hemiparesis, and lung cancer. Hemiplegia is paralysis on one side while hemiplegia is weakness on one side of the body. Resident #1…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Actual harm · G2025-06-13 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, and staff, resident, responsible party (RP), Hospice Nurse, Physician, and Medical Director interviews, the facility failed to provide ongoing assessments after a fall; failed to identify a change in condition that required medical evaluation and treatment; failed to notify a provider of a change in condition; failed to identify one leg shorter than the other and external leg rotation required medical evaluation and treatment; failed to communicate effectively to provide treatment; and failed to notify a provider of fracture x-ray fax results upon receipt for one (Resident #1) of three residents reviewed for abuse and/or neglect. Resident #1 sustained an acute impacted left femoral neck fracture. (an acute impacted left femoral neck fracture is a break in the upper part of the thigh bone (femur), specifically at the neck, where it connects to the ball of the hip joint). Findings included: This tag is cross referred to: F580: Based on record review, and staff, responsible party (RP), Hospice Nurse, and Physician interviews, the facility failed to notify 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.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2025-06-13 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, and staff, responsible party (RP), resident, Hospice Nurse, Physician, and Medical Director interviews the facility failed to provide ongoing assessments after a fall; failed to identify the change in condition required medical evaluation and treatment; failed to identify one leg shorter than the other and external leg rotation required medical evaluation and treatment; and failed to communicate effectively to provide treatment for one (Resident #1) of three residents reviewed for assessment after a fall. Resident #1 sustained an acute impacted left femoral neck fracture (an acute impacted left femoral neck fracture is a break in the upper part of the thigh bone (femur), specifically at the neck, where it connects to the ball of the hip joint). Findings included: Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of history of cerebral vascular accident, hemiplegia, hemiparesis, and lung cancer. Hemiplegia is paralysis on one side while hemiplegia is weakness on one side 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 · F2026-06-12 · 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 food and nutrition services manager with the competencies and skills required to carry out food and nutrition services for 115 of 116 residents who received meal trays. Finding included:During an interview on 6/11/26 at 3:00 PM, the Registered Dietitian stated she was hired a month prior to the start of survey. She further stated she worked part-time and came to the facility once a month and was available to staff if needed on the phone.During an interview on 6/11/126 at 3:10 PM, Dietary Supervisor stated he was supervising the kitchen for the past month. The Dietary Supervisor indicated that the Dietary Manager had quit her job without notice and he was asked to supervise the kitchen. The Dietary Supervisor stated he did not have Certified Dietary Manager (CDM) certification and was going to start a ServSafe (food and beverage safety training and certificate program administered by the US National Restaurant Association) course on 6/25/26. He indicated he did not have any certification or dietary education.During…
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 · F2026-06-12 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — widespreadEnsure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of 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 observation, record review, and interviews with residents, resident representative and staff, the facility failed to ensure residents' menus and/or individual food plans met their nutritional needs, prescribed diet consistencies, and documented food preferences for 2 of 9 residents reviewed for food plans (Residents #89 and #116). The facility failed to follow standard recipes and failed to serve the indicated serving size during the lunch meal for 1 of 1 tray line observation. This practice had the potential to affect food served to residents. Findings included: 1. Review of the hospital discharge summary for Resident #89 dated 1/19/26 documented no known allergies and a regular diet. Resident #89 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including hepatic encephalopathy, mild protein calorie malnutrition, dietary zinc deficiency, and unspecified vitamin deficiency. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] showed Resident #89 was cognitively intact and his oral/dental status 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 before2026-06-12 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to keep the floors and walls behind the deep fryer and stove clean and free of dirt and oil. Staff failed to keep the oven, stove, deep fryer, and steam table backsplash clean and free of burnt food and food stains. Staff failed to label food stored for use in 1 of 1 reach in refrigerator and ensured that dry food with a scoop inside it was covered and labeled with the correct name. In addition, the facility failed to keep trash containers in the kitchen covered, failed to store cleaning equipment away from clean dishes, and failed to discard chipped plates and remove cups with dried food on them from the tray line. Dietary staff with facial hair failed to use facial hair covers to cover their facial hair for 2 of 2 staff observed. The facility also failed to maintain the ceiling to prevent peeling paint. These failures had the potential to affect food served to residents.Findings included:1a. Observation on 6/10/26 at 11:13 AM revealed that the kitchen floor had a wet appearance and had pieces of paper…
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 · F2026-06-12 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — widespreadDispose of garbage and refuse properly.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations and staff interviews, the facility failed to keep the dumpster area free of accumulated trash and debris for 3 of 3 dumpsters observed. This practice had the potential to attract pests and rodents.Findings included:On 6/8/26 at 10:40 AM an observation was conducted of the dumpster area located behind facility. There were 3 large green dumpsters. While facing the dumpsters the dumpster on the left side was observed with the lid and the sliding side doors closed. The middle dumpster was observed to contain broken down folded cardboard boxes that were protruding from an opening in the front. The lid was closed. The dumpster to the right had the lid and the side sliding door open. This dumpster was observed to contain food waste not contained in bags and bagged waste. Flies were observed on the waste in this dumpster. Non-contained waste debris was observed littering the ground in front of, between, beside and behind the dumpsters. This debris included disposable plates, cups, empty and full condiment packets, and soiled napkins. Food waste was also observed on 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 · E2026-06-12 · 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 a review of the Resident Council meeting minutes and interviews with Resident Council members, the facility failed to resolve concerns voiced by the Resident Council members during 4 of the 7 previous Resident Council meetings (Resident Council meetings held on 3/30/26, 4/23/26, 5/20/26, and 5/27/26).Findings included:The Resident Council meeting minutes from January 2026, February 2026, March 2026, April 2026, and May 2026 were reviewed.The Resident Council meeting minutes dated 3/30/26 revealed residents voiced concerns the coffee was always cold, linen was not being stocked on all floors, call lights were not being answered, snacks and ice were not being passed out, and they were not being given a choice of cereal.No grievance report was located for the concerns voiced by the Resident Council from the 3/30/26 meeting.The Resident Council meeting minutes dated 4/23/26 revealed residents voiced concerns about cold coffee, snacks and ice not being passed out, call lights not being answered, staff being on their phone during work hours, and staff not going to the first floor…
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 · E2026-06-12 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, resident and staff interviews the facility failed to ensure 2 urinals (Resident #5 and #88) and 6 bath basins (Resident #5, #88, #21, #38, #65, and #85) were labeled for each resident and stored in a sanitary manner. The facility failed to ensure a privacy curtain was clean and was free from coming into contact with the floor (Resident #116). The facility also failed to ensure resident rooms were clean as evidenced by soiled and sticky floors (Resident #89 and #116), a sticky floor (Resident #6), failed to keep a Packaged Terminal Air Conditioner (PTAC) unit from dust and debris (Resident #57), and failed to keep a resident's room wall surface smooth and intact as evidenced by damaged sheetrock and missing paint (Resident #91). This deficient practice affected 11 of 16 residents (Resident #5, #6, #21, #38, #57, #65, #85, #88, #89, #91, and #116) reviewed for environment. Findings included: 1. a. An observation was completed on 06/08/26 at 12:02 PM of the bathroom for Resident #5 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 · Ecited before2026-06-12 · tag F0641 — patternEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to accurately code the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for the use of tobacco, indwelling urinary catheter, insulin and dental status for 4 of 20 residents (Resident #100, Resident #62, Resident #76, and Resident #6 ) reviewed for MDS accuracy. Findings included: 1. Resident #100 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of tobacco use. The Smoking Observation Form indicated a smoking observation was made on 12/7/25. The form indicated that the resident was a smoker and had a history of smoking. Based on the observation, Resident #100's smoking status was determined to be unsupervised smoker. The significant Change Minimum Date Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident was assessed as cognitively intact. Resident #100 assessment indicated no for current tobacco use. During an interview on 6/12/26 at 4:21PM, MDS Nurse #1 stated the facility was a smoke free facility and hence was documenting all residents as…
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 · E2026-06-12 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record reviews, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to complete a smoking assessment (Resident #100) and complete a quarterly smoking assessment (Resident #100 and Resident #62). The facility failed to secure smoking material (cigarettes and ignition material) for 3 of 3 residents (Resident #100, Resident #62, and Resident #104) reviewed for safe smoking. The facility also failed to secure one oxygen cylinder stored in a resident's room for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #99) reviewed for accidents. Findings included: A review of the smoke free policy revised on 2/10/26 revealed that, effective 1/1/15, smoking was not allowed on the facility premises by visitors, staff, or residents. The policy encouraged residents to participate in a smoking cessation program. The admission Director or admitting nurse informed residents and/or legal guardians of the smoking policy upon admission. The policy stated that residents should not keep smoking materials in their possession. Staff were…
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 before2026-06-12 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — patternEnsure 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, Medical Director and staff interviews, the facility failed to prevent a significant medication error when lacosamide and zonisamide (anticonvulsant medications used to treat epilepsy) were transcribed and administered to Resident #127 incorrectly. This was for 1 of 10 residents (Resident #127) whose medications were reviewed. The findings included: Resident #127 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included traumatic brain injury and post traumatic seizures. He was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] after a hospitalization for seizure activity.A physician order dated 01/06/25 read; zonisamide suspension (used to treat seizures); 10 milligrams (mg)/milliliter (ml); amount to administer: 4ml (40 mg) via gastric tube at bedtime for seizures. Order discontinued on 10/29/25.Another physician order dated 01/06/25 read; lacosamide solution (used to treat seizures); 10 mg/mL; amount to administer: 5ml (50mg) via gastric tube twice a day at 9:00 AM &…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-06-12 · tag F0809 — failed to serve meals on a reasonable schedule — patternEnsure meals and snacks are served at times in accordance with resident’s needs, preferences, and requests. Suitable and nourishing alternative meals and snacks must be provided for residents who want to eat at non-traditional times or outside of scheduled meal times.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interviews with the Registered Dietitian, staff and 5 of 5 residents present in the Resident Council Group Meeting (Resident #17, Resident #4, Resident #85, Resident #91 and Resident #92) the facility failed to serve a nourishing snack to residents at bedtime.Findings included:A review of the scheduled mealtimes provided by the facility revealed the time between dinner (the evening meal) and breakfast the following day was 15 hours.On 06/9/26 at 11:30 AM a Resident Council meeting was conducted with 5 cognitively intact members of the Resident Council (Resident #17, Resident #4, Resident #85, Resident #91 and Resident #92). All 5 members stated they were not regularly offered a snack at bedtime but could get one if they asked. The residents reported they had not approved of a time of greater than 14 hours between the dinner meal and breakfast the next morning.On 06/9/2026 at 7:33 PM Nurse Aide (NA) #1 was observed delivering snacks on the 100 Hall. She reported she had worked at the facility for 15 years on the 3:00 PM to 11:00 PM shift. She stated 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.
Show the remaining 33 citations
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-06-12 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — patternSafeguard 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 reviews, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to maintain complete and accurate medical records for wound care (Resident #4, Resident #17, and Resident #76) for 3 of 6 residents reviewed for wound care. Findings Included: 1a. Review of the April 2026 Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed treatment for the pressure ulcer to the left ischium was documented by Nurse #6 on 04/20/26, 04/21/26, 04/25/26, 04/26/26, and 04/27/26. Review of the May 2026 Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed treatment for the Stage 4 pressure ulcer to the left buttock/ischium was documented by Nurse #6 on 05/26/26, 05/27/26, 05/28/26, and 05/29/26. Review of the June 2026 Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed treatment for the Stage 4 pressure ulcer to the left buttock/ischium was documented by Nurse #6 on 06/01/26, 06/02/26, 06/03/26, 06/09/26, 06/10/26, and 06/11/26. The Wound Nurse documented the treatment on 06/04/26. On 06/09/2026 at 2:25 PM, 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.
- Potential for harm · E2026-06-12 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — patternDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, Pharmacist, resident, responsible party (RP) and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide education regarding the benefits and potential side effects of the influenza immunization with documentation in the medical record and failed to offer the influenza immunization during the influenza season (October to March) for 6 of 7 residents reviewed for influenza immunization (Residents #38, #39, #56, #71, #77 and #121). The findings included: The facility's policy and procedure on influenza immunizations dated [DATE] was reviewed. The policy stated, in part, all patients who had no medical contraindications to the vaccine would be offered the influenza vaccine annually. The policy further indicated that the facility would provide pertinent information about the significant risks and benefits of the vaccine to patients and/or family members. Additionally, the policy read that current and newly admitted patients would be offered the influenza vaccine beginning on [DATE]st of each year, it…
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 · E2026-06-12 · tag F0887 — patternEducate residents and staff on COVID-19 vaccination, offer the COVID-19 vaccine to eligible residents and staff after education, and properly document each resident and staff member's vaccination status.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record reviews, resident, responsible party (RP) and staff interviews, the facility failed to assess residents for the eligibility and ensure residents were offered the COVID-19 booster vaccination for 6 of 7 residents reviewed for COVID-19 booster immunizations (Residents #38, #39, #56, #71, #77 and #121). The findings included: The facility's policy and procedure on COVID-19 Vaccination, dated 5/3/24 was reviewed. The policy stated, in part, all partners, residents and patients who had no medical contraindications to the vaccine would be offered the updated COVID-19 vaccine per the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommendations to encourage and promote the benefits associated with the vaccinations against COVID-19. The policy further indicated that the facility would provide pertinent information about the significant risks and benefits of the vaccine to partners, residents, patients and/or family members. A review of the CDC guidelines, dated 11/19/25, indicated that the CDC…
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 · D2026-06-12 · 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 observation, record review, resident and staff interviews the facility failed to maintain a resident's dignity when staff spoke to a resident in an undignified manner. The resident stated she was upset by the way the staff member spoke to her when the staff told her not to hit her call bell (Resident #69). This deficient practice affected 1 of 5 residents reviewed for dignity and respect. The findings included:Resident #69 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with hemiplegia (paralysis of one entire side of the body) and hemiparesis following CVA (cerebral vascular accident/stroke) affecting the left non-dominant side.A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #69 was moderately cognitively impaired. She was assessed as needing substantial assistance with turning in bed and dependent.During an observation of Resident #69 on 6/11/26 at 2:58 PM it was noted her call bell was draped across the foot of the bed and lying on the floor. Resident #69 stated the staff put it…
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 · D2026-06-12 · tag F0554 — isolatedAllow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, resident, staff and Nurse Practitioner interviews, the facility failed to assess the ability of a resident to safely self-administer medications for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for self-administering medications (Resident #135).The findings included:Resident #135 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of bipolar disorder and major depressive disorder, single episode, with psychotic features.Review of the annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated Resident #135 was cognitively intact without behavioral concerns.A review of the active orders revealed an order dated 6/3/26 through 6/9/26 for Cipro 500 milligrams (mg); 1 tablet orally twice daily.A review of the nursing progress notes for Resident #135 revealed the following written by the Director of Nursing: 6/3/26 5:38 PM Resident is refusing to have her blood drawn for a CBC (complete blood count that measures the types and numbers of blood cells in your blood) with diff . She also has her own…
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 · D2026-06-12 · 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 observation, record review, and interviews with Resident and staff, the facility failed to honor residents' choices of getting out of bed for 2 of 11 residents reviewed for self determination (Residents #116 and #69). Findings included: 1. Resident #116 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including incomplete quadriplegia (paralyzed from the neck down with minimal movement of his arms), traumatic brain injury, muscle weakness, spastic hemiplegia (involuntary jerking movements of his arms and legs). Review of the care plan for Resident #116 dated 4/13/26 for Activities of Daily Living (ADL) care due to impaired mobility included interventions to explain procedures prior to touching the resident, to report any rejection of care, and to encourage the resident to get out of bed as part of his long term participation in activities he enjoys. The annual Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] indicated Resident #116 was cognitively intact and was dependent on staff for bed mobility and activities 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 · D2026-06-12 · tag F0582 — isolatedGive residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
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 and Health Care Power of Attorney interviews, the facility failed to distribute the funds within 30 days of discharge for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for refund of deposit (Resident #127).Findings included:Resident #127 was admitted to the facility on [DATE].A review of the discharge tracking Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #127 had a planned discharge to another facility on 03/07/26.On 06/09/26 at 1:30 PM a phone interview was conducted with Resident #127's Health Care Power of Attorney (HCPOA). The HCPOA explained Resident #127 was discharged to another skilled nursing facility on 03/07/26 and was owed a refund of approximately $1000. On 06/12/26 at 9:05 AM an interview with the Business Office Manager was conducted. She stated she received an email from the accepting facility in April 2026 indicating that they had not received Resident #127's funds. The Business Office Manager stated she initiated the the refund for Resident #127 on approximately 04/18/26 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 · D2026-06-12 · 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 record reviews, observations, and staff interviews, the facility failed to develop an individualized and comprehensive care plan for the potential for or history of behavioral symptoms as well as the use of psychotropic medications (Resident #35) and dental concerns (Resident #62). This deficient practice affected 2 of 10 residents reviewed for dementia and dental concerns. The findings included: 1. Resident #35 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included traumatic brain injury, mood disorder, dementia with other behavioral disturbance, anxiety disorder and depression. A review of Resident #35's nursing progress notes from 3/26/26 to 4/2/26 revealed episodes of disrobing in the hallway and propelling self in wheelchair to other residents' rooms. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #35 had severe cognitive impairment and displayed wandering behavior one to three days during the seven-day look back period. He was coded for the use 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 · D2026-06-12 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to complete a comprehensive care plan within 7 days of the admission Minimum Data Set assessment for 1 of 3 residents (Resident # 104) reviewed for smoking. The findings included:Resident #104 was admitted to the facility 4/6/26.A smoking assessment dated [DATE] assessed Resident #104 to be a safe smoker. The admission Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] noted Resident #104 was cognitively intact and was coded for Current Tobacco Use.Review of Resident #104's medical record on 6/8/26 at 12:00 PM revealed no care plan that addressed smoking.An interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 6/11/26 at 1:30 PM. The DON reported she was not certain why Resident #104 did not have a care plan for smoking in place. The DON reported that the nurse completing the admission assessment should have initiated the smoking care plan. The DON reported she expected all smokers to have smoking addressed in a care plan on admission.
- Potential for harm · D2026-06-12 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, Medical Director, and staff interviews, the facility failed to administer insulin per the parameters in the physician order (Resident #62) for 1of 1 resident reviewed for well-being. The findings included: Resident #6 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of diabetes mellitus.Review of Resident #6's active physician orders showed the following: An order dated 10/13/25 for insulin lispro insulin pen, 100 units/milliliters (mL). Administer 10 units subcutaneously once daily with breakfast. Special instructions: hold if blood glucose is less than 90; give half dose (5 units) if blood glucose is less than 120; do not administer if the resident is not eating. An order dated 5/17/26 for insulin lispro insulin pen, 100 units/mL. Administer 8 units subcutaneously twice daily at 12:00PM and 5:00PM. Special instructions: hold if blood glucose is less than 90; give half dose (4 units) if blood glucose is less than 120; do not administer if the resident is not eating.Review of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-06-12 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, physician, and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide wound care for a non-pressure wound as order by the physician for 1 of 6 residents reviewed for wound care (Resident #76).The findings included:Resident #76 was readmitted to the facility 5/25/26 with diagnoses including hypertension, diabetes, and an unspecified open wound.Review of the physician orders revealed an order dated 5/25/26 for wound care to be completed to the wound on the lower right leg: cleanse with antiseptic wound cleanser, apply medi-honey (a topical antiseptic that provides moisture and protection to healing wounds) to the wound, apply a silicone bordered foam, change dressing every 3 days and as needed.A skin care assessment completed by Nurse #3 on 5/25/26 noted a skin tear to the right lower leg with an intact dressing and wound care ordered.The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] documented Resident #76 was cognitively intact and did not reject care. The assessment did not…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-06-12 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
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, staff, and Physician interviews, the facility failed to apply a right hand palmar guard orthosis (type of hand splint designed to protect the palm of the hand from injury caused by severe finger flexion contractures, also called palm protectors) as outlined in the care plan for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #8) reviewed for contractures and range of motion (ROM). Findings included:Record review showed that Resident #8 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included hemiplegia (complete paralysis on one side of the body) and hemiparesis (partial weakness on one side) following a cerebral infarction (stroke) affecting the right dominant side, a right wrist contracture, and a right hand contracture. Review of the Occupational Therapy (OT) Discharge summary dated [DATE] showed the resident received OT services from 4/14/26 through 4/30/26. At discharge, the resident had plateaued at the maximum producible end range Passive Range of Motion (PROM) and tolerated 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 · D2026-06-12 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews with the Nurse Practitioner, resident, and staff, the facility failed to implement an active order to obtain a urinalysis with culture and sensitivity for a resident who exhibited symptoms of a urinary tract infection. This deficient practice resulted in missed diagnostic evaluation and affected 1 of 6 residents reviewed for urinary care management (Resident #135).The findings included:Resident #135 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of cognitive communication deficit and prediabetes.Review of the annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #135 was cognitively intact. A review of the Nurse Practitioner (NP) progress note dated 5/29/26 signed by NP #2 read Resident #135 was seen on 5/29/26 and endorsed feelings of dysuria (pain, burning, or discomfort with urinating) and would like a urinalysis (UA) with culture and sensitivity ordered. In the orders section of the progress note was an order for a UA with culture 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 · D2026-06-12 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, Nurse Practitioner and staff interviews, the facility failed to transcribe blood glucose monitoring orders on admission to monitor the use of an oral diabetic medication for 1 of 10 residents whose medications were reviewed (Resident #130). The findings included: Resident #130 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included type 2 diabetes. A review of Resident #130's hospital discharge medication list dated 9/25/25 included an order for blood glucose monitoring (accucheck) three times a day. The discharge summary indicated Resident #130 utilized Metformin (a hypoglycemic medication used to treat diabetes) 500 milligrams (mg) one tablet daily with breakfast to control the type 2 diabetes. The September 2025 physician orders did not include an order for blood glucose monitoring three times a day, however, it did include the order for Metformin 500 mg one tablet daily with breakfast. An interview occurred with Nurse #6 on 6/10/26 at 11:05 AM, who admitted Resident #130…
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 before2026-06-12 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure 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 record review, observations, and interviews with the resident, Physician, and staff, the facility failed to secure prescribed medications stored at bedside for 2 of 6 residents reviewed for medication storage (Resident #84 and Resident #104). The findings included: 1. Resident #84 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of seborrheic dermatitis (a skin condition that causes redness, scaley patches, and rashes on areas of the body). The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed that Resident #84 had severe cognitive impairment. A review of the physician's orders revealed an order dated 6/4/26 for Triamcinolone Acetonide Cream 0.025% (cream used to relieve redness, itching, and dryness caused by skin conditions), with instructions to apply a small amount of the cream to the red area on the right side of his back and to the forearms daily for treatment of seborrheic dermatitis. A review of Resident #84's medical records revealed he had not been assessed 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 · D2026-06-12 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — isolatedEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
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, observation, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to accommodate food preferences for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for food preferences (Resident #56).The finding Included:Resident #56 was admitted to the facility on [DATE].A review of Resident #56's records revealed a form titled Diet History/Food Preference List, completed by the Former Dietary Manager. The form indicated Resident #56 disliked foods such as bacon, beef liver, beef, veal, bologna, chicken liver, chicken, chili, enchiladas, fish, ham, lasagna, pork, sausage, shrimp, tuna, turkey, and other. The form was undated.The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], revealed Resident #56 was cognitively intact and able to eat independently.A dining observation of Resident #56's lunch tray occurred on 06/09/2026 at 1:30 PM. The observation revealed brown, ground-up food on the resident's tray that had been pushed to the side. Resident #56's dietary meal ticket identified the meat as Mech Soft (mechanical soft diet,…
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 · D2026-06-12 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, record review, physician, Physician Assistant, and staff interviews, the facility failed to implement their infection control policy regarding hand hygiene when a staff member failed to perform hand hygiene while performing wound care (Resident #17). This deficient practice occurred for 1 of 28 staff observed for infection control (Wound care nurse).The findings included:Review of the facility policy Infection Prevention and Control with a revised date of 3/11/21 revealed the following: The Infection Prevention and Control Program will incorporate risk assessments, surveillance activities, evidence-based prevention practices, education, and communication to mitigate risks and decrease adverse outcomes related to Infection Prevention and Control.The responsibilities of the Infection Preventionist include directing all infection control activities and assessing, developing, implementing, monitoring, evaluating, and managing the Infection Control Program.Objectives include surveillance activities to identify infections and causative factors and identify…
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 · D2026-06-12 · tag F0914 — isolatedProvide bedrooms that don't allow residents to see each other when privacy is needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, observations and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide a working privacy curtain that allowed for full visual privacy to protect a resident from view of others during activities of daily living care while bathing. This deficient practice affected 1 of 3 residents reviewed for privacy curtains (Resident #57).The findings included:On 6/11/26 at 10:33 AM an observation was conducted for activities of daily living (ADL) care for Resident #57. Resident #57's bed was closest to the door of the room. NA #2 was providing Resident #57 a bed bath with the door closed and privacy curtain pulled between Resident #57 and her roommate who was resting in bed. This surveyor was standing at the foot of Resident #57's bed during the observation when Nurse #1 simultaneously knocked on and opened the door to the resident's room. Resident #57's bare bottom was exposed to the hallway while being washed. No other staff or visitors were observed in the hallway. Nurse #1informed NA #2 that the hospice NA needed to visit Resident #57's roommate then told hospice NA #1 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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-06-13 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — patternSafeguard 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
Based on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to effectively document in the electronic medical record for conveyance of medical information for two (Resident #1 and Resident #5) of three residents reviewed for accidental falls. Resident #1 lacked initial documentation of a fall by Nurse #4, initial physical assessments by Nurse #4, and administration of pain medication by Nurse #2 and Nurse #3. Resident #1 had incorrect documentation of the administration of pain medication by Nurse #5. Resident #5 lacked documentation of a nursing physical assessment after a fall. Findings included: 1. a. Documentation on a timesheet for Nurse Aide (NA #1) revealed she worked at the facility from 7:18 AM to 10:53 PM on 5/17/2025. Documentation on the corresponding nursing schedule revealed NA #1 was assigned to care for Resident #1 during that time period. NA #1 was interviewed on 6/10/2025 at 11:54 AM. NA #1 revealed the following information. Resident #1 had a fall on 5/17/2025. NA #1 heard Resident #1 fall, and she told Nurse #4. Nurse #4 was interviewed on 6/10/2025 at 6:41…
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 · D2025-06-13 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
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 and a resident interview, the facility failed to immediately notify the Administrator of an abuse allegation made by a resident for one (Resident #2) of three residents reviewed for abuse investigations. Findings included: Documentation on the facility procedures for Reporting Patient Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation, Mistreatment, and Misappropriation of Property dated as last reviewed on 11/15/2024 revealed the following statement. Any allegations, suspicion, or identified occurrence identified involving patient abuse, neglect, exploitation, mistreatment, and misappropriation of property, including injuries of an unknown source, should be immediately reported to the Administrator of the provider entity. Resident #2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of schizophrenia, depression, dementia, and bipolar disorder. Documentation on a quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #2 was cognitively intact, always incontinent of bowel 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 · Ecited before2025-04-04 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — patternEnsure 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 reviews and interviews with staff, resident, and the Pharmacist, the facility failed to administer medications as ordered for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #64). Staff did not remove medication from the refrigerator believing the medication had not been received by the pharmacy, resulting in 11 missed doses of eyedrops for glaucoma. Findings included: Resident #64 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including glaucoma. A physician's order dated 1/04/2025 noted Resident #64 was to receive timolol maleate 0.5 % eyedrops twice a day for glaucoma. Resident #64's February 2025 Medication Administration Record (MAR) noted she did not receive her timolol maleate eyedrops on 2/01/2025 at 9:00 AM, 2/01/2025 at 5:00 PM, 2/11/2025 at 5:00 PM, 2/12/2025 at 5:00 PM, 2/13/2025 9:00 AM, and on 2/14/2025 at 9:00 AM. The reasons noted by nursing staff were that the medication was unavailable, and they were awaiting delivery from the pharmacy. Resident #64's March 2025 MAR noted she did not receive…
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 before2025-04-04 · 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 observation and staff interviews, the facility failed to cover facial hair during food service for 1 of 2 dietary staff (Cook #1) observed and clean the convection oven and the deep fryer. These practices had the potential to affect food served to residents. The findings included: 1. During a follow-up tour of the kitchen, an observation and interview with [NAME] #1 were conducted on 4/2/25 at 11:30 AM. [NAME] #1 had facial hair and was without facial hair covering while taking temperatures of the lunch meal items located in the steam table. [NAME] #1 stated he did not cover his facial hair because he was about to go on break. He stated he should have always covered his beard and mustache while in the kitchen. During a follow-up interview with the DM on 4/2/25 at 11:40 AM, she revealed that the dietary staff were trained most recently on facial hair coverings last Friday (3/28/25). All dietary staff should know how to always cover facial hair while in the kitchen and [NAME] #1 should have taken the food temperatures prior to going on break. The Administrator was interviewed…
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 before2025-04-04 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
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, records review, and resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to apply a left-hand splint for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #31) reviewed for contractures. Findings included: Resident #31 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting left non-dominant side, contractures of muscle (multiple site), altered mental status, diabetes mellitus type2, and congestive heart failure. Review of the physician orders dated 10/17/24 indicated Occupational Therapy (OT) to be provided 5 times per week for 8 weeks and treat diagnoses of left hemiplegia, contractures, reduced mobility, impaired coordination, and general weakness. This order was discontinued on 12/5/24. Review of the OT Discharge summary dated [DATE] indicated Resident #31 received OT services from 10/17/24 to 12/5/24. The resident at discharge was able to tolerate left upper extremity wrist/hand orthosis (external devices to correct alignment 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 · D2025-04-04 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolatedEnsure 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 observations, record review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to label and shake a new tube feeding formula bottle before hanging for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #307). The findings included: Review of the facility's Enteral Feeding: Using a Pump instructions for nurses dated 2022 read in part: Shake the container of formula to ensure that it is mixed well .Label the bag or container with the type of formula, strength, amount, and rate of administration as well as the date, time, and your initials. Resident #307 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included stroke, dysphagia, and gastrostomy status (surgical procedure for inserting a tube through the abdomen wall and into the stomach. The tube is used for feeding or drainage). Review of Resident #307's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed he was severely cognitively impaired and required substantial/maximal assistance with most activities of daily living (ADL). Resident #307 received all…
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 before2025-04-04 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure 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 record review, observations and staff interviews, the facility failed to date opened multi-dose pen injectors of insulin medication in 2 of 5 medication administration carts (100 hall and 200 hall), failed to remove expired multi-dose pen injectors of insulin from the medication cart drawer for 1 of 5 medication administration carts (200 hall). Findings included: 1.a. On 3/31/25 at 9:55 AM, an observation of the medication administration 100 hall cart with Nurse #1 revealed one opened and undated multi-dose vial of Lantus insulin pen fill. A review of the manufacturer's literature indicated to discard Lantus insulin multi-dose vial 28 days after opening. On 3/31/25 at 10:00 AM, during an interview, Nurse #1 indicated that the nurses who worked on the medication carts, were responsible for discarding opened and undated multi-dose vials. She mentioned that per training/competency, every nurse should put the date of opening on multi-dose medications. The nurse stated that she had not checked the date of opening on insulin vials in her medication administration cart at 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 before2024-09-19 · 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, and staff interviews, the facility failed to prevent a significant medication when a nurse administered 40 mg of liquid morphine when the physician order was for 5mg to 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #1) reviewed for medication administration. The findings included: Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Schizophrenia, Dysphagia, Depression, chronic pain, muscle spasm, and gastrostomy status (medication/nutrition through a feeding tube). The quarterly Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] indicated Resident #1 had short/long term memory problems, gastrostomy status and received medication/nutrition through a feeding tube. Review of the medical record documented Resident #1's was discharged from Hospice services on 6/19/24 and code status as DNR (do not resuscitate). The physicians order dated 10/27/23 revealed an order for morphine concentrate - Schedule II solution; 100 mg/5 mL (milligram/milliliter) (20 mg/mL); Amount to Administer: 0.25 mL (5MG);…
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 before2024-01-12 · 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, record reviews and interviews the facility failed to maintain the ice scoop holder clean, failed to have deep fryer cleaned and free of food crumbs, failed to maintain the walk-in freezer clean, failed to discard expired food from reach-in refrigerator, failed to label, and date food placed in 2 of 2 nourishment refrigerator. Failed to ensure dietary staff covered their facial hair. These practices had the potential to affect food served to residents. Findings included: 1. On 1/8/24 at 6:10 AM, observation of the ice scoop holder placed beside the ice machine in the kitchen revealed black colored stains on the base of the scoop holder. During an interview on 1/8/24 at 6:10 AM, the dietary manager stated the scoop holder should be washed daily. Review of the Cleaning Schedule form- Daily for 1/6/24 and 1/7/24 revealed the ice scoops were cleaned and sanitized. There was no mention of the ice scoop holder. 2. On 1/8/24 at 6:15 AM, during an observation of the deep fryer equipment. The fryer had dried food crumbs on the top panel of the equipment. The floor below…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-01-12 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interviews the facility failed to ensure advanced directive information was accurate throughout resident's electronic and paper medical records for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #97) reviewed for advanced directives. Findings included: Resident #97 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #97's electronic medical record (EMR) revealed a physician's order dated 8/14/23 that read full code. This order was still active on 1/10/24. Resident #97's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #97 was moderately cognitively impaired. Review of a physician progress note dated 1/3/24 read in part spoke with (Guardian), agrees with DNR status. Resident #97's EMR showed a communication banner on the top of Resident #97's opened EMR and her code status read DNR (Do Not Resuscitate). Resident #97's EMR showed no copy of a signed DNR form scanned into the medical record. Review of the code status binder located at the nurse's station showed Resident #97 had a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-01-12 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to accurately complete a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment to reflect a resident's admission to Hospice for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #13) reviewed who had received Hospice services. The findings included: Resident #13 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A review of the resident's electronic medical record (EMR) revealed Resident #13 was admitted to Hospice on 10/12/23. Further review of Resident #13's EMR revealed a significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] was completed. The MDS section on Health Conditions indicated Resident #13 had a life expectancy of less than 6 months. However, the MDS section on Special Treatments, Procedures, and Programs did not report the resident received Hospice services while she was a resident. An interview was conducted on 1/11/24 at 2:25 PM with the facility's MDS nurses. When asked what prompted the significant change MDS to be completed for Resident #13 on 10/18/23, the nurses…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-01-12 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure 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, interviews with staff, and record reviews, the facility failed to: 1) Label a medication stored on 1 of 2 medication (med) carts (300 Long Hall Med Cart) with the minimum information required, including the resident's name; 2) Store medications in accordance with the manufacturer's storage instructions on 1 of 2 med carts (300 Long Hall Med Cart); and 3) Maintain clean and sanitary conditions for the storage of medications on 1 of 2 medication carts observed (200 Short Hall Med Cart). The findings included: 1. An observation was conducted on 1/10/24 at 2:40 PM of the 300 Long Hall Medication (Med) Cart in the presence of Nurse #4. The observation revealed the following medications were stored on the med cart: a. An opened vial of Novolog insulin was stored on the med cart. Neither the insulin vial itself nor the medication vial it was stored in was labeled with the minimum information required, including the name of the resident the insulin had been dispensed for. b. An unopened bottle of 1% prednisolone acetate ophthalmic suspension (a steroid eye drop…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-01-12 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — isolatedSet 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 staff interviews and record review, the facility's quality assurance (QA) process failed to implement, monitor, and revise as needed the action plan developed for the recertification surveys dated 10/27/22 in order to achieve and sustain compliance. These were for recited deficiencies cited during a recertification survey on 1/12/24. The deficiencies were in the following areas: comprehensive assessment, quarterly assessment, and encoding. The continued failure during two federal surveys of record showed a pattern of the facility's inability to sustain an effective quality assurance program. The findings included: This tag is cross-referenced to: 1. F636- Based on staff interviews and record review, the facility failed to complete a comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment within 14 days of the Assessment Reference Date (the last day of the assessment period) for 1 of 32 residents (Residents #51) whose MDS assessments were reviewed. During a previous recertification and complaint investigation on 10/27/22, the facility failed to complete admission Minimum Data Set…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · C2026-06-12 · tag F0732 — widespreadPost nurse staffing information every day.
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 accurately document actual working hours of licensed staff for 6 of 6 daily nurse staffing sheets reviewed (5/6/26, 5/15/26, 5/17/26, 6/1/26, 6/2/26, and 6/6/26). The findings included:Review of the posted nurse staffing sheets for 5/6/26, 5/15/26, 5/17/26, 6/1/26, 6/2/26, and 6/6/26 revealed the following:a. The posted nurse staffing sheet dated 5/6/26 indicated 2 Registered Nurses (RNs) worked the day shift (7:00 AM to 3:00 PM) and provided 24 hours of care during the 8-hour shift.The posted nurse staffing sheet indicated 3 Licensed Practical Nurses (LPNs) provided 36 hours of care during the 8-hour shift. The posted nurse staffing sheet for afternoon shift (3:00 PM to 11:00 PM) indicated 3 RNs provided 36 hours of care and 7 LPNs provided 84 hours of care during the 8-hour shift. The posted nurse staffing sheet indicated 1 RN provided 36 hours of care for the night shift (11:00 PM to 7:00 AM), and 2 LPNs provided 84 hours of care during the 8-hour shift.Review of the schedule for this date revealed hours of care…
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 · B2024-01-12 · tag F0640 — patternEncode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record reviews and staff interviews, the facility failed to complete a Discharge Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment within the required time frame for 2 of 3 residents (Resident # 93, and Resident # 99) selected for Resident Assessments and for 1 of 9 residents whose closed records were reviewed (Resident #13). Findings included: 1. Resident # 93 was admitted on [DATE]. The last MDS assessment completed and transmitted was an admission MDS dated [DATE]. Review of the progress note date 8/28/23 revealed the resident was sent to the emergency room. Review of the discharge return anticipated MDS assessment revealed an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 8/28/23. The assessment indicated it was still in process. During an interview on 1/11/24 at 1:51 PM, the MDS Nurse #2 indicated the resident was discharged to the hospital on 8/28/23 and the discharge MDS was not completed. MDS Nurse #2 stated she received the missing assessment report from the Nurse Consultant on 1/10/24 and the resident's assessment 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.
“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
$34,632 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $34,632 — penalty dated 2025-06-13
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 PRUITTHEALTH — 95 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 | 2.9 | -1.9 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 1 of 5 | 2.8 | -1.8 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 2.5 | -0.5 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 3 of 5 | 3.6 | -0.6 vs chain |
The other 94 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.9★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 94; lowest-rated first.
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 | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| UNITED HEALTH SERVICES OF NORTH CAROLINA INC | Organization | DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 11/27/2013 |
| DURHAM HEALTHCARE PROPERTIES, INC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/16/2007 |
| J PAIGE PRUITT TRUST | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | since 06/05/2003 |
| LISA P HAMBY TRUST | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | since 06/05/2003 |
| NEIL L PRUITT JR TRUST | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | since 06/05/2003 |
| NWP 2020 CHILD TR FBO NEIL L PRUITT JR | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 08/12/2020 |
| UNITED HEALTH SERVICES INC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 11/27/2013 |
| PRUITT, NANCY | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 11/27/2013 |
| SMALL, PHILIP | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 11/27/2013 |
| PRUITT, NEIL | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/27/2013 |
| MCPHAUL, TANYA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/28/2025 |
| O BRIEN, PATRICK | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/01/2011 |
| PRUITTHEALTH CONSULTING SERVICES INC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/26/2013 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 20 rows in the source record cover these 13 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
8 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 $2.8M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 22% 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 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 345061. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-06-12, 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.