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

Elizabeth City Health and Rehabilitation

1075 US Highway 17 South, Elizabeth City, NC 27909 · For profit - Individual · 170 certified beds · (252) 338-3975 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse/neglect citation on record (F0600) — cited Oct 2023Resident-funds citation (F0570)3 immediate-jeopardy citations1 actual-harm citation CMS recorded as corrected before the inspection ended (past non-compliance)$77,760 in federal fines1 Medicare payment denial
Insights

This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.

In its favor
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (24% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Oct 2023
  • 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 (F0570)
  • inspectors cited 3 immediate-jeopardy problems — the most serious level
  • inspectors recorded 1 serious finding as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (22) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • the CMS record shows $77,760 in federal fines (most recent 2023-10-28)
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
  • about 32% 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.

2/5
CMS overall
2 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 2 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 3 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 3 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★ 3/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
1805 W CITY Dr Ste H · (252) 334-1602 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
1700 W Ehringhaus St · (252) 331-1201 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
Food Lion0.5 mi
683 S Hughes Blvd · (252) 331-1301 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Forest Park Elizabeth City North Carolina · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

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

Overall rating2★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased15.3%15.6%15.4%typical
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight3.0%7.2%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder1.5%0.7%0.9%worse
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%2.3%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms6.3%5.9%6.5%typical
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.0%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury3.6%3.5%3.3%typical
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened20.7%18.3%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication23.2%21.3%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%94.1%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers13.1%5.5%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control18.7%20.7%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table8.7%14.0%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.3%1.4%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine95.9%78.1%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission25.8%22.9%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit14.8%12.9%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.591.781.67typical
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days2.031.801.80worse

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.

62.4% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 629 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

62.4%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.5%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
59.5%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.80U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.33hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.39hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.08hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 59.5% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 220 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 0.80 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 94% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 17% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF62.4%CMS range 57.4–65.851.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.5%CMS range 8.5–12.810.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge59.5%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge54.1%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge44.1%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified98.8%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting98.8%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay1.2%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.6%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.6%CMS range 5.8–9.87.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.151.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

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

Staffing

0.25
RN hours/ resident / day
1.36
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.28
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.89
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.21
RN hoursweekends
23.7%
Total nursing turnover
42.9%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 170 beds and averages 150.8 residents a day — about 89% occupied, or roughly 19 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 3.89 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.25 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.28 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.40 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.09 on weekdays — 17% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.27 to 0.21 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 24% is below the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

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

Inspection trend

1
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-06-19)
3
at the previous standard inspection (2024-04-05)

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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

22 citations, most serious first. The 15 most serious are shown; the remaining 7 are one tap away and print in full.

  • Immediate jeopardy · J2023-11-22 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
    Immediately 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, staff interviews, and Medical Director interview the facility failed to notify the physician of administering long-acting insulin to Resident # 1 who had not consumed dinner and had a blood glucose level of 89 mg/dL (milligrams per deciliter). The facility failed to notify the physician after significant changes in condition for Resident #1 which included: obtaining a blood glucose level of 29 mg/dL (a normal blood glucose level range is 70 to 99 mg/dL) requiring the administration of glucagon (a manmade version of a hormone made by the pancreas that raises blood glucose levels); and obtaining a blood glucose level of 27 mg/dL, and the inability to administer glucagon to the Resident during a medical emergency. Resident #1 was one of one resident reviewed for notification of the physician. Emergency Medical Services (EMS) was contacted to take Resident #1 to the emergency room on [DATE] for hypoglycemia (low blood glucose). EMS treated Resident #1 with 1 mg glucagon intermuscular. Upon…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2023-11-22 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff interviews, Pharmacy Nurse Consultant interview, Pharmacist interview, and Medical Director interview, the facility gave long-acting insulin to Resident #1 who had a blood sugar reading of 89 milligrams/deciliter (mg/dL) and had not eaten the dinner meal; failed to monitor the resident for any signs and symptoms of hypoglycemia (low blood glucose) after insulin administration; failed to monitor and complete ongoing thorough assessments by rechecking a blood glucose level as ordered after a hypoglycemic event requiring the intervention of glucagon (used to treat very low blood glucose); and failed to effectively respond to a medical emergency of hypoglycemia for one (Resident #1) of three residents reviewed for diabetes care. Emergency Medical Services (EMS) was contacted to take Resident #1 to the emergency room on [DATE] for hypoglycemia. EMS treated Resident #1 with 1 milligram glucagon intramuscularly. Upon arrival at the hospital, a repeat glucose level resulted in a blood…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Immediate jeopardy · J2023-11-22 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — isolated
    Ensure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff, Pharmacist, Pharmacy Nurse Consultant, and Medical Director interviews the facility failed to demonstrate competency knowing what effective immediate interventions needed to be implemented for treatment of hypoglycemia (low blood glucose) and competency in obtaining life-saving medication from an automated medication dispensing system for one (Resident #1) of one resident reviewed for nursing competency. Emergency Medical Services (EMS) was contacted to take Resident #1 to the emergency room on [DATE] for hypoglycemia. EMS treated Resident #1 with 1 mg glucagon intermuscular. (Glucagon is a manmade version of a hormone made by the pancreas that raises blood glucose levels.) Upon arrival at the hospital, a repeat glucose level of 24 mg/dL (a normal blood glucose level is 70 to 90 milligrams per deciliter) was taken, and 50 % Dextrose was intravenously administered along with a renal diet consumed orally. Immediate Jeopardy began on 11/12/2023 when nursing staff failed to demonstrate…

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

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Actual harm · G2023-10-28 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
    Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, observation, staff interview, resident interview, physician interview, physician assistant interview, and family interview the facility failed to prevent intentional inappropriate touching for one of three residents reviewed for resident-to-resident abuse. Resident #1 was observed by Resident #3 touching the breasts of Resident #2 under her shirt after the conclusion of a planned activity event with a gathering of the residents. Resident #2 did not have the cognition to express an adverse outcome, inappropriate touching of their breasts would have traumatized a reasonable female person. A family member of Resident #2 confirmed Resident #2 would have been devastated, furious, and mad at being touched inappropriately by a man if she was not cognitively impaired. Findings included: Documentation in the electronic medical record revealed Resident #1 had cumulative diagnoses some of which included stroke, hemiplegia, and vascular dementia. Documentation on a care plan for Resident #1 dated 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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Actual harm · G2023-01-27 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide care safely when a resident (Resident #295) was provided with incontinence care. Resident #295 fell from the bed during care and sustained a 2.5-centimeter (cm) laceration to her head with bleeding and she reported pain in her back and head post fall. Resident #295 was sent to the hospital and required 3 staples to close the laceration. This was for 1 of 8 residents reviewed for accidents (Resident #295). Findings included: Resident #295 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Alzheimer's and contractures. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) Annual assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #295 had severely impaired cognition, was incontinent of bowel and bladder, and was dependent on 2 staff members for bed mobility. Record review of Resident Care Guide (no date) revealed Resident #295 was non-ambulatory, had contractures, and was dependent on staff for bathing and transfers by 2 staff members. Resident #295 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · E2024-04-05 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — pattern
    Ensure 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

    Based on observations of the meal service tray line, record review, interviews with the Registered Dietitian and staff, the facility failed to ensure residents on the 900 hall received the correct portion sizes based on the menu. This failure had the potential to affect 1 out of 9 halls. The findings included: Review of the document, Census List dated 4/4/24 revealed diets and consistency of food textures served for 24 residents on the 900 hall. The report indicated 19 residents received textured foods of a regular consistency, and 5 residents received mechanically soft foods. Review of the weekly menu revealed on 4/4/24 items served for lunch included pulled pork, braised cabbage, and roasted sweet potatoes. Review of the kitchen measurement chart revealed the perforated spoodle was equivalent to half a cup or 4 to 5 ounces. Review of the document, Production Sheet dated 4/4/24 included the portion sizes of food items listed on the lunch menu. For mechanically soft and regular textured diets, the pulled pork portion size was 4 ounces. A continuous observation of lunch meal service…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-11-22 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
    Safeguard 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 record review and staff interview, the facility failed to accurately document a blood glucose reading as ordered for one (Resident #1) of one resident reviewed for accuracy of medical records. Findings included: Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with cumulative diagnoses some of which included Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and end stage renal disease. Resident #1 had a physician's order initiated on 11/8/2023 for Accu-checks twice a day at 6:00 AM and 9:00 PM to measure blood glucose levels. Documentation in the nursing notes for 11/12/2023 at 3:51 AM written by Nurse #3 revealed, Resident (#1) screaming out loud and thrashing around in the bed pushing back at staff trying to give him help. Resident (#1) was also sweating profusely. This nurse was able to check resident's blood [glucose] and the result was 29 (mg/dL). Using standing orders for glucagon emergency kit for low blood [glucose] one single dose 1 [milliliter subcutaneously] was given. Will recheck blood [glucose] in 15 minutes. 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-11-22 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — isolated
    Set up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, and interviews with Medical Director, Pharmacy Nurse Consultant, Pharmacist, and staff, the facility's Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) Committee failed to maintain implemented procedures and monitor the interventions the committee put into place following the focused infection control and complaint investigation survey of 1/19/21 and the recertification and complaint investigation survey of 1/27/23. This was for 3 deficiencies recited on the current complaint investigation survey of 11/22/23 in the areas of: Notification of Changes (F580), Quality of Care/Professional Standards (F684), and Complete and Accurate Medical Records (842). The continued failure during two federal surveys of record shows a pattern of the facility's inability to sustain an effective QAA program. The findings included: This tag is cross referenced to: F580: Based on record review, staff interviews, and Medical Director interview the facility failed to notify the physician of administering long-acting…

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

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-10-28 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolated
    Develop 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 interview the facility failed to identify resident to resident abuse and failed to immediately report resident to resident abuse to the Administrator and Director of Nursing per facility policy for one of three abuse investigations reviewed. Findings included: Documentation in the abuse policies and procedures of the facility dated last reviewed on 10/2022 defined sexual abuse as, Nonconsensual sexual contact of any type with a resident or contact with any person incapable of giving consent. The same abuse policy and procedure revealed under section B. Intervention 1. Upon receiving reports of abuse, the supervisor, Administrator, and Director of Nursing are immediately notified. Documentation in the electronic medical record revealed Resident #1 had cumulative diagnoses some of which included stroke, hemiplegia, and vascular dementia. Documentation on a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #1 had a BIMS (Basic Interview for Mental Status)…

    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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-01-27 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — pattern
    Provide activities to meet all resident's needs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff interviews, and Responsible Party (RP) interview, the facility failed to provide an ongoing resident centered activities program that include one on one (1:1) activities to meet the interests of a resident that did not participate in group activities for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for activities (Resident #110). Findings included: Resident #110 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of Parkinson's. Record review of the Activity Progress Note dated 10/14/22 at 12:32 pm revealed the Activities Director met with Resident #110 and she reported she enjoyed animals, playing games, keeping up with the news, listening to country music, and watching television. Activity staff were to encourage group and independent activities and monitor for resident's individual activity needs. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) admission assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #110 had moderate cognitive impairment. Resident #110 reported it was very important to her to listen to the music 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-01-27 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation and staff interviews, the facility failed to remove expired medications stored in 1 of 2 medication rooms observed (Sycamore Medication Room). Findings included: During an observation on 1/26/23 at 12:10 pm of the Sycamore Medication Room with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) the following expired medication were observed. The expiration dates were confirmed by the ADON prior to removal of the medications. 1 box with 60 Heparin lock flush solution syringes with expiration date of 9/2021. 1 box with 19 Heparin lock flush solution syringes with expiration date of 7/2022. 1 box with 60 Heparin lock flush solution syringes with expiration date of 9/2022. 1 box with 60 Heparin lock flush solution syringes with expiration date of 11/2022. 1 box with 30 Heparin lock flush solution syringes with expiration date of 11/2022. During an interview on 1/26/23 at 12:10 pm the ADON stated the Unit Manager was responsible to ensure the expired medication was returned to pharmacy. During an interview on 1/26/23 at 12:29 pm the Unit Manager stated the syringes were 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-01-27 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — pattern
    Set up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review, staff, and the facility ' s Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) Committee failed to maintain implemented procedures and monitor interventions the committee put into place following the 1/19/21 focused infection control and complaint investigation survey and the 11/18/21 recertification survey. This was for 2 recited deficiencies on the current recertification and complaint investigation survey of 1/27/23 in the areas of infection control (F880) and label/store drugs and biologicals (F761). The continued failure during two or more federal surveys of record shows a pattern of facility ' s inability to sustain an effective QAA committee. The findings included: This tag was cross referenced to: a. F880: Based on observation, record review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to implement infection control policies and procedures (1) when Nurse Aide (NA) #1 failed to remove isolation gown and gloves and perform hand hygiene before exiting a COVID-19 isolation room, (2) Nurse #1 failed to replace oxygen tubing that was on floor before placing in residents'…

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

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-01-27 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to implement infection control policies and procedures (1) when Nurse Aide (NA) #1 failed to remove isolation gown and gloves and perform hand hygiene before exiting a COVID-19 isolation room, (2) Nurse #1 failed to replace oxygen tubing that was on floor before placing in residents' nose (Resident #87), and (3) failed to perform hand hygiene between 4 of 4 residents when passing meal trays (Resident #101, Resident #70, Resident #62, Resident #115). Findings included: The facility was in COVID-19 outbreak status as of 1/12/23. Record review of the prior four-week period of COVID-19 facility testing revealed 4 staff and 13 residents had tested positive. The dates of the most recent staff and resident positive COVID-19 results were 1/11/23, 1/19/23, 1/20/23, and 1/21/23. Record review of the facility policy titled Policies and Practices Infection Control dated 10/2022 revealed the facility's infection control policies and practices 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-01-27 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to code the Minimum Data Set assessment accurately for 1 of 5 sampled residents (Resident #51) reviewed for nutrition. The findings included: Resident #51 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with multiple diagnoses that included chronic heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, dysphagia and failure to thrive. The quarterly Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] indicated Resident # 51 was on a physician- prescribed weight loss regimen. Review of the care plan dated 1/24/23 revealed Resident #51 had significant weight loss related to diuretics resolving fluid issues. Staff were to provide supplements as ordered. Review of the physicians' orders revealed Resident #51 was to receive a No added Salt, mechanical soft diet. An interview with MDS nurse #1 on 1/27/23 at 1:18 PM revealed the resident was not on a prescribed weight loss diet and was coded inaccurately on the current MDS assessment. An interview with the Dietary Manager on 1/27/23 at…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-01-27 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, resident and staff interview the facility failed to provide Activities of Daily Living (ADL) care for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #30) who was dependent on facility staff for ADL care. The findings included: Resident #30 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included polyneuropathy (A condition the affects the nervous system and causes problems with sensation and coordination). A review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #30 was cognitively intact and was totally dependent on staff for personal hygiene. Resident #30 ' s care plan last reviewed 11/7/22 revealed a goal that Activities of Daily Living/Personal Care would be provided by staff due to resident ' s impaired mobility. An observation and interview with Resident #30 on 1/24/23 at 9:30 AM revealed she had facial chin hair. Resident #30 stated that she liked to keep the hair on her chin shaved. She stated that staff usually shaved her chin when giving her a bath. An…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
Show the remaining 7 citations
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-01-27 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, resident interview, staff interviews, and physician interviews, the facility failed to provide the care for ear wax removal as recommended by a physician for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for communication (Resident #123). Findings included: Resident #123 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Record review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Quarterly assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #123 was cognitively intact and had adequate hearing without a hearing aid or other device. Record review on the Physician Visit note dated 1/09/23 revealed Physician Assistant (PA) #1 assessed Resident #123's reported ear wax buildup and determined her to have wax impaction in both ears. PA #1's treatment recommendation was Debrox (ear wax removal drops) and irrigation. Record review of PA #1's email correspondence to in-house providers revealed no communication regarding Resident #123's ear wax buildup and recommendation for Debrox and irrigation. Record review of Resident #123's physician orders revealed…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • No harm found · Bcited before2025-06-19 · tag F0641 — pattern
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to accurately code the Minimum Data Set Assessment (MDS) for 1 of 31 sampled residents (Resident #42) reviewed for MDS accuracy. The findings included: Resident #42 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A nursing progress note dated 04/02/2025 revealed Resident #42 was admitted to the facility with a pressure wound located on her right ankle. The admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] coded Resident #42 as having 1 unhealed, unstageable pressure ulcer, not present on admission. An interview was completed on 06/18/2025 at 2:35 PM with the MDS Nurse. The MDS Nurse verified the admission MDS dated [DATE] was inaccurate and the pressure wound should have been coded as present upon admission/entry or reentry to the facility. An interview was completed on 06/19/2025 at 1:13 PM with the facility Administrator. The Administrator stated it was her expectation that the MDS assessment should have been coded correctly and accurately reflected the Resident…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has plan of correction
  • No harm found · Bcited before2024-04-05 · tag F0623 — pattern
    Provide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal 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 record review, staff interviews, and Ombudsman interview, the facility failed notify the Ombudsman in writing of the resident's transfer to the hospital for 3 of 4 residents reviewed for hospitalization (Resident #92, Resident #94, and Resident #349). The findings included: 1. Resident #92 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #92 was severely cognitively impaired. Review of Resident #92's progress notes revealed the Resident was transferred to the hospital on 2/28/2024 and was readmitted to the facility on [DATE]. The review further revealed Resident #92 was transferred to the hospital on 3/19/2024, was readmitted to the facility on [DATE], and was again transferred to the hospital on 3/30/2024 and readmitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident #92's medical record on 4/3/2024 revealed no documentation in the medical record that the Ombudsman was notified of the transfers to the hospital. A review completed on 4/3/2024…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has plan of correction
  • No harm found · Bcited before2024-04-05 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — pattern
    Set up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review, staff interviews, and Ombudsman interview, the facility's Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) Committee failed to maintain implemented procedures and monitor the interventions the committee put into place following the 1/27/23 recertification and complaint investigation survey. This was for two recited deficiencies on the current recertification and complaint investigation survey of 4/05/24 in the areas of Notice Requirements Before Transfer/Discharge (F623) and Accuracy of Assessments (F641). The continued failure during two federal surveys of record shows a pattern of the facility's inability to sustain an effective QAA program. The findings included: This tag is cross-referenced to: F623: Based on record review, staff interviews, and Ombudsman interview, the facility failed notify the Ombudsman in writing of the residents transfer to the hospital for 3 of 4 residents reviewed for hospitalization (Resident #92, Resident #94, and Resident #349). During the 1/27/23 recertification and complaint investigation survey 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.

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has plan of correction
  • No harm found · C2023-01-27 · tag F0570 — widespread
    Assure the security of all personal funds of residents deposited with the facility.
    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 interview, the facility failed to provide a surety bond which named the residents of the facility as the obligee for 43 of 43 residents who had personal funds accounts with the facility. The findings included: The facility surety bond dated 1/1/23 titled Patient Trust Funds Bond Surety Bond revealed the principal was listed as [NAME] City Health and Rehabilitation, LLC and the obligee was listed as State of North Carolina. An interview with the Administrator on 1/25/23 at 1:32 PM revealed she was not aware that the State of North Carolina was the obligee and she would be following up with corporate.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has plan of correction
  • No harm found · C2023-01-27 · tag F0577 — widespread
    Allow residents to easily view the nursing home's survey results and communicate with advocate agencies.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to inform the residents of the location and availability of the facility's survey results. This failure affected all residents in the facility. The findings included: During an initial tour of the building on 1/23/2023 at 11:09am, survey results were unable to be located. No signage was observed posted regarding the availability and location of survey results. Resident council interview was conducted on 1/24/2023 at 2:30pm. During the meeting 7 of 7 residents, (Residents #19, 123, 108, 88, 24, 41, and 67) and Resident Council members stated they did not know where the survey results were located and had not seen any signage that directed residents to the location. Residents #19 and #24 stated they would wish to review the state survey results binder but did not know its location. During an interview with the Activities Director (AD) on 1/24/2023at 10:22am she stated she reviews with residents the location of the state survey results regularly. She stated she did not know where the state survey results 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has plan of correction
  • No harm found · Ccited before2023-01-27 · tag F0623 — widespread
    Provide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal 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 record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to notify the Ombudsman in writing when 6 of 6 residents (Residents #1, #143, #55, #110, #51, and #102) transferred to the hospital. The findings included: a. Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #1 was discharged to the hospital on 3/5/2022 and returned to the facility on 3/8/2022. Resident #1 was discharged to the hospital on [DATE] and returned to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #1 was discharged to the hospital on 1/17/2023 and returned to the facility on 1/17/2023. b. Resident #55 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #55 Resident #55 was discharged to the hospital on [DATE] and returned to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #55 was discharged to the hospital on [DATE] and returned to the facility on [DATE]. Record review of the Nursing Progress Note dated 10/17/2022 at 2:32pm revealed Resident #55 was admitted for further evaluation for infection of the abdomen. Record review of the Nursing Progress Note…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has plan of correction

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

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

Fines & penalties

$77,760 in federal fines across 1 penalty. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.

  • $77,760 — penalty dated 2023-10-28
  • Medicare payment denial — starting 2023-11-16 for 14 days

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to SANSTONE HEALTH & REHABILITATION — 18 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 2 of 54.2-2.2 vs chain
Health inspection 2 of 53.9-1.9 vs chain
Staffing 3 of 52.7+0.3 vs chain
Quality measures 3 of 54.3-1.3 vs chain
The other 17 homes this chain runs (chain average 4.2★, per CMS)

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
SPRENGER, CHRISTOPHERIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 01/01/2016
ELIZABETH CITY HEALTHCARE PROPERTIES, LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTERESTsince 01/01/2016
WARING, TINAIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 10/17/2022

1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

$22.8M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+9.2%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$6.5M
Related-party expense32% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 58%Medicare 24%Other / private 19%

This home reported $6.5M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 32% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

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

Cost & finances

$386per resident / day
operating cost
$11,734per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$425per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

What families pay in NC

Paying with Medicaid

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

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

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

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 345036. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-06-19, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

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

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

What to do next