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

PruittHealth-Elkin

560 Johnson Ridge Road, Elkin, NC 28621 · For profit - Corporation · 100 certified beds · (336) 835-7802 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
1 immediate-jeopardy citation$15,734 in federal fines
Insights

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

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (32% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
Worth asking about
  • inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
  • the CMS record shows $15,734 in federal fines (most recent 2024-07-05)
  • about 24% 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.

3/5
CMS overall
3 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 3 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 3 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★ 3/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
177 Parkwood Dr · (336) 835-3400 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
505 Samaritans Ridge Ct Ste 101 · (336) 258-2255 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
1404 N Bridge St · (336) 835-5277 · Call to confirm hours
Park
310 Standard St · (336) 794-6478 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 2 to 3 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 rating3★
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 increased7.6%15.6%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight4.4%7.2%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.5%0.7%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.4%2.3%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.0%5.9%6.5%check this — see note marked star below the table
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 injury2.6%3.5%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened13.2%18.3%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication22.6%21.3%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%94.1%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers5.9%5.5%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control4.1%20.7%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table16.1%14.0%17.1%typical
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.4%1.4%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine97.8%78.1%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission21.5%22.9%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit8.9%12.9%12.0%better

* 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.

61.1% 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 188 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

61.1%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
13.3%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
60.0%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.56U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.33hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.19hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.03hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 60.0% 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 55 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 0.56 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 86% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 13% 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 SNF61.1%CMS range 54.3–68.051.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF13.3%CMS range 10.4–17.410.7%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 discharge60.0%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 discharge49.1%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 discharge58.2%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified98.5%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final 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 stay0.0%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 worsened3.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization6.3%CMS range 3.8–10.57.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.901.02Oct 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

0.83
RN hours/ resident / day
0.63
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.25
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.72
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.48
RN hoursweekends
31.5%
Total nursing turnover
33.3%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 100 beds and averages 91.9 residents a day — about 92% occupied, or roughly 8 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 3.72 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.83 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.25 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 3.16 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.95 on weekdays — 20% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.97 to 0.48 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 32% is below the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

1
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-06-05)
2
at the previous standard inspection (2024-03-14)

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.

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

  • Immediate jeopardy · K2024-07-05 · 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 observations, record review, facility policy, and interviews with Resident #1, staff, Local Health Department Representative, State Health Department Representative, State Health Department Medical Provider, Nurse Consultant to the North Carolina Hepatitis Program, facility Attending Physician, facility Medical Director, and Corporate Medical Director, the facility failed to immediately implement effective precautions to prevent further transmission of bloodborne pathogens to other residents who required blood glucose monitoring and failed to immediately begin training on acute hepatitis B following Resident #1's diagnosis of acute hepatitis B. Acute hepatitis B is a serious liver infection caused by the hepatitis B virus. The disease is commonly spread by unsafe injection practices and exposure to infected body fluids. This deficient practice affected 30 of 30 residents including Resident #1 who received glucose monitoring. Immediate jeopardy began on 05/10/24 when Resident #1 readmitted from the acute…

    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 · D2025-06-05 · tag F0645 — isolated
    PASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and staff interviews the facility failed to refer residents with serious mental disorders to the state's mental health authority for Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) assessments, upon admission for 2 of 2 residents reviewed with serious mental disorders (Residents #21 and #42). Findings included: 1. Resident #21 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included bipolar disorder. , The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #21 was cognitively intact with the diagnosis of bipolar disorder and received antipsychotic medication. Review of the facility's records indicated Resident #21 was not referred to the state-designated authority for PASRR screening. On 6/4/25 at 11:14 a.m., the facility's Financial Counselor revealed she was responsible for requesting PASSR screenings of residents by the state-designated authority when notified by the MDS nurse of newly admitted residents who had diagnoses requiring…

    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 · D2024-03-14 · 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 observation, record review and resident, staff and physician interviews, the facility failed to secure smoking materials, specifically, a lighter and failed to assess a resident's ability to smoke independently for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #2) reviewed for smoking. Findings included: Resident #2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included cerebral infarction due to embolism of left middle cerebral artery, hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting right dominant side, idiopathic epilepsy, and epileptic syndromes with seizures of localized onset, intractable, without status epilepticus (also called refractory, uncontrolled, or drug-resistant epilepsy), repeated falls, and vascular dementia, moderate, with other behavioral disturbance. A review of the observation for smoking assessment dated [DATE] revealed the facility had marked no on the smoking assessment form, indicating Resident #2 did not smoke. A review of the most recent quarterly 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2023-01-11 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations and staff interviews, the facility failed to maintain the tile of the kitchen floor in good condition and failed to dispose of expired nutritional supplements in 1 of 3 residents' nourishment room refrigerators. Findings included: 1. During the initial tour of the kitchen on [DATE] at 10:00 a.m. and during the follow-up visit on [DATE] at 12:00 p.m., there were missing floor tiles observed beneath the meal tray serving steamtable, the dishwashing machine, and beneath the 3-compartment wash sink. An interview with the Dietary Manager revealed the kitchen floor had the missing tiles for approximately 8-9 years due to a problem with drainage pipes which were repaired, and the areas were covered with concrete, but the floor tiles were never replaced. During an interview on [DATE] at 9:32 a.m., the Administrator stated the kitchen's floor had been in that condition for approximately 8-9 years. She indicated she had been in discussion with corporate office's area vice president for about six…

    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 · F2023-01-11 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — widespread
    Dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on observations and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure the side doors and top lids of 2 of 2 trash dumpsters remained closed when not in use. Findings included: During the initial tour of the facility accompanied by the Dietary Manager on 1/08/23 at 10:50 a.m., two trash dumpsters were observed enclosed within a fenced in area with the side doors of the dumpsters open. Half of the top lid of 1 of 2 of the dumpsters was open with two filled trash bags lying on top of the closed half of the lid. Throughout the observation, it was raining and both dumpsters were filled with trash bags. A second observation with the Dietary Manager on 1/10/23 at 12:25 p.m. revealed the side door of 1 of the 2 trash dumpsters was open. There were plastic bags of trash in the dumpster.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2023-01-11 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — widespread
    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 observations, record review, resident and staff interviews, the facility's Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) committee failed to maintain implemented procedures and monitor interventions the committee put into place following the recertification and complaint surveys conducted 4/1/2021 and 1/9/2020, and a complaint survey conducted 5/28/2021. This was for three deficiencies that were cited in the areas of Activities meet the interest and need of each resident (F679), Increase or prevent a decrease in range of motion and mobility (F688), and food procurement, store/prepare/serve-sanitary (F812). The three areas were recited on the current recertification survey of 1/11/2023. The duplicate citations during two federal surveys of record demonstrates a pattern of the facility's inability to sustain an effective QAA program. The findings included: This tag is cross referenced to: 1. F679 - Based on observations, interview with the Resident Council, resident and staff interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to provide activities as scheduled when the Activities…

    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 · E2023-01-11 · 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 observations, interview with the Resident Council, resident and staff interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to provide activities as scheduled when the Activities Director (AD) was placed in the Nurse Aide (NA) role. Additionally, the facility failed to provide any scheduled activities on the weekends. This was for 4 of 4 residents (Residents #52, #38, #20 and #26) reviewed for facility activities. Findings included: 1. Resident #52 was admitted to the facility 12/19/2022 with a diagnosis that included, in part, diabetes. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #52 was cognitively intact. The assessment indicated the resident stated it was very important to her to do things with groups of people, to have books, magazines and newspapers to read, to participate in religious services and to do her favorite activities. The care plan, updated 12/23/22, included a focus area of activities/recreation. A care plan intervention revealed Resident #52 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 · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-01-11 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    Develop 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 — 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 review and revise the care plan in the areas of range of motion for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #33) reviewed for range of motion. The findings included: Resident #33 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His cumulative diagnoses included nontraumatic intracerebral hemorrhage, Parkinson's disease, hemiplegia, and contractures of the bilateral hips, bilateral ankles, right knee, and left hand. A review of Resident #33 ' s most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) was a quarterly assessment dated [DATE]. The MDS indicated the Resident had severe cognitive impairment, was dependent on one staff member for all activities of daily living (ADL) care needs and had limited range of motion in bilateral upper and lower extremities. A review of Resident #33's care plan dated 9/5/2022 identified the following problem areas: 1) The Resident had impaired ADL functioning related to a history of a cerebral vascular accident (CVA) with left side…

    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 · D2023-01-11 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolated
    Provide 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, staff interviews, and record review, the facility failed to provide treatment and services to a resident (Resident #33) who demonstrated a reduction in range of motion of the bilateral lower extremities in the hips, ankles, and knee, and in the left upper extremity. This occurred in 1 of 2 residents reviewed for limited range of motion. The findings included: Resident #33 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His cumulative diagnoses included nontraumatic intracerebral hemorrhage, Parkinson's disease, hemiplegia, and contractures of the bilateral hips, bilateral ankles, right knee and left hand. A review of Resident #33 ' s most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) was a quarterly assessment dated [DATE]. The MDS indicated the Resident had severe cognitive impairment, was dependent on one staff member for all activities of daily living (ADL) care needs, and had limited range of motion in bilateral upper and lower extremities. A review of Resident #33 ' s care plan dated 9/5/2022 identified 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-01-11 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
    Provide 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 observations, staff interviews, and record review, the facility failed to keep a urinary catheter bag from touching the floor to reduce the risk of infection or injury for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #33) reviewed with indwelling urinary catheters. The findings included: Resident #33 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His cumulative diagnoses included nontraumatic intracerebral hemorrhage, reflux uropathy, Parkinson's disease, and hemiplegia. A review of Resident #33 ' s most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) was a quarterly assessment dated [DATE]. The MDS indicated the Resident had severely impaired cognitive skills and had an indwelling urinary catheter. A review of Resident #33 ' s care plan dated 9/5/2022 identified a problem area that read: The Resident has a urinary catheter related to hydronephrosis and a ureteral stone with stent placement. The interventions included to keep the drainage bag below the level of the bladder with a privacy bag in place, prevent tension on the urinary meatus (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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • No harm found · C2024-03-14 · tag F0575 — widespread
    Post a list of names, addresses, and telephone numbers of all pertinent State agencies and advocacy groups and a statement that the resident may file a complaint with the State Survey Agency.
    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 post the contact information for the State Survey Agency in an area accessible to residents and resident representatives and failed to post a statement that a resident may file a complaint with the State Survey Agency. This observation occurred for 2 of the 4 days of the recertification survey. Findings included: During tours of the facility on 3/12/24 at 4:07 PM and 3/13/24 at 10:20 AM, there was no information posted in the facility about how to contact the State Survey Agency or how to file a complaint with the State Survey Agency. A Resident Council group meeting was conducted on 3/13/24 at 2:30 PM. During the meeting, Resident #29 and Resident #58 stated they had seen some contact numbers on a board located on the wall on the 100 hall, but they were unsure if the contact information included the State Survey Agency. A tour of the facility was conducted with the Administrator on 3/13/24 at 2:45 PM. The Administrator verified the contact information for the State Survey Agency and process for filing 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 Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has plan of correction
Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

$15,734 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $15,734 — penalty dated 2024-07-05

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 →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 3 of 52.9+0.1 vs chain
Health inspection 3 of 52.8+0.2 vs chain
Staffing 3 of 52.5+0.5 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 53.6+0.4 vs chain
The other 94 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.9★, per CMS)
1 of 5Oaks - Athens Skilled Nursing, TheAthens, GA 1 of 5PruittHealth - Holly Hill, LLCValdosta, GA 1 of 5PruittHealth - LilburnLilburn, GA 1 of 5PruittHealth- AikenAiken, SC 1 of 5PruittHealth- ColumbiaColumbia, SC 1 of 5PruittHealth- Rock HillRock Hill, SC 1 of 5PruittHealth-Carolina PointDurham, NC 1 of 5PruittHealth-DurhamDurham, NC 1 of 5PruittHealth-TrentNew Bern, NC 1 of 5PruittHealth-Union PointeMonroe, NC 1 of 5Pruitthealth - AustellAustell, GA 1 of 5Pruitthealth - Lakehaven, LLCValdosta, GA 1 of 5Pruitthealth - MaconMacon, GA 1 of 5Pruitthealth - Magnolia ManorMoultrie, GA 1 of 5Pruitthealth - Old CapitolLouisville, GA 1 of 5Pruitthealth - PalmyraAlbany, GA 1 of 5Pruitthealth - SwainsboroSwainsboro, GA 1 of 5Pruitthealth - ToccoaToccoa, GA 1 of 5Pruitthealth - West AtlantaAtlanta, GA 2 of 5NC State Veterans Home-KinstonKinston, NC 2 of 5PruittHealth - AugustaAugusta, GA 2 of 5PruittHealth- BambergBamberg, SC 2 of 5PruittHealth- DillonDillon, SC 2 of 5PruittHealth- EstillEstill, SC 2 of 5PruittHealth- Moncks CornerMoncks Corner, SC 2 of 5PruittHealth- RidgewayRidgeway, SC 2 of 5PruittHealth-NeuseNew Bern, NC 2 of 5Pruitthealth - BrookhavenAtlanta, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth - CreeksideAugusta, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth - DecaturDecatur, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth - FairburnFairburn, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth - Fleming IslandFleming Island, FL 2 of 5Pruitthealth - ForsythForsyth, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth - GriffinGriffin, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth - Richmond, LLCAugusta, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth - RomeRome, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth - SavannahSavannah, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth - Valdosta, LLCValdosta, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth-North Tampa, LLCLutz, FL 2 of 5The Oaks-BrevardBrevard, NC

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 / managerTypeRoleSince
REECE, LINDAIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 02/10/2014
PRUITT, NEILIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 06/08/2005

CMS files one row per role, so the 3 rows in the source record cover these 2 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.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

$12.8M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+1.5%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$3.0M
Related-party expense24% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 57%Medicare 9%Other / private 34%

This home reported $3.0M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 24% 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

$378per resident / day
operating cost
$11,489per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$384per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

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 345124. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-06-05, 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