PruittHealth-Farmville

Location & what’s nearby

Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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.

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.

40.9% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 39 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.46 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 77% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 35% 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 56 beds and averages 49.2 residents a day — about 88% occupied, or roughly 7 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.36 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.73 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.06 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.96 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.52 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.80 to 0.55 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 49% is about the same as 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

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

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

20 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 9 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · G2025-05-22 · 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 effective supervision to prevent avoidable falls for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for high risk of falls (Resident #1 and Resident #2). Resident #1, a severely cognitively impaired resident, sustained a collarbone fracture and a hematoma (a solid swelling of clotted blood within the tissues) on the left side of the forehead from a fall that occurred after staff monitoring her fell asleep (Nurse Aide #1) and ignored her attempt to stand (Nurse #1). Findings included: 1. Resident #1 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had multiple diagnoses, some of which included intellectual disabilities, dementia, and age-related osteoporosis. Review of the resident profile in the electronic medical record revealed Resident #1 was at high risk for falls. Documentation on the care plan dated as initiated on 1/25/2024 for Resident #1 revealed a focus area for fall risk related to generalized weakness. Documentation on the care plan listed 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 · E2025-08-07 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
  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

  Based on observations, record review, and staff interviews the facility failed to discard out of date leftover resident food items stored in the facility's resident nourishment refrigerator. This deficient practice was for 1 of 1 resident nourishment refrigerators reviewed.Findings included:On 8/5/25 at 11:21 AM an observation of the facility's resident nourishment refrigerator with Dietary Manager #1 revealed a sign on the refrigerator door indicating it was the resident's refrigerator. Blank labels were observed in a plastic sleeve on the door with a sign reading, All food requires a name and date. Food left past 2 days will be discarded. Dietary Manager #1 was interviewed during the observations. The interior of the refrigerator revealed one large white foam container labeled and dated 7/27/25 containing cooked chicken, one large white foam container labeled and dated 7/27/25 containing corn, macaroni and cheese, and cooked greens which all appeared hard and dry, and a plastic bag labeled and dated 7/26/25 containing an unrecognizable hard, light pink rectangular object that…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-07 · 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 interviews, the facility failed to accurately code the Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) status and failed to accurately code the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment in the area of oral/dental status for 2 of 15 resident MDS assessments reviewed (Resident #4, Resident #21).Findings included: 1. Resident #4 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her active diagnoses included schizophrenia, major depressive disorder, and anxiety disorder. Review of Resident #4’s PASARR Level II Determination Notification letter dated 4/29/21 revealed it had no end date. Review of Resident #4’s Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed she was coded as not currently considered by the state PASARR Level II process to have a serious mental illness. During an interview on 8/5/25 at 11:29 AM the Social Worker stated Resident #4 had a PASARR Level II determination with no end date. During an interview on 8/5/25 at 11:50 AM the MDS Coordinator stated the 12/6/24 MDS…

  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 before2025-08-07 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to implement the care planned intervention of a fall mat for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #21) reviewed for accidents.Findings included:Resident #21 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of dementia.A review of Resident #21's comprehensive care plan revealed a focus area initiated on 11/1/24 and last reviewed on 8/4/25 of at risk for falls related to senile dementia of the brain. The goal was for Resident #21 to not sustain any injury related to falling through the next review. An intervention, dated 6/6/25, was fall mat beside bed right side.A review of Resident #21's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed he was severely cognitively impaired. He had no functional limitation in range of motion of his upper or lower extremities. He used a wheelchair for mobility. He required supervision to roll left and right in bed, to go from sitting on the side of the bed to lying flat and to go from…

  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 · D2025-08-07 · tag F0791 — failed to provide routine dental services — isolated
  Provide or obtain dental services for each 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 observations, record review, and resident, staff, and Responsible Party (RP) interviews the facility failed to provide or obtain routine dental services for a resident with obvious or likely cavity and broken natural teeth. This was for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #21) reviewed for dental care.Findings included:Resident #21 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of dementia.A review of a physician's order for Resident #21 dated 11/1/24 revealed in part May have dental care as needed.A review of Resident #21's nursing admission Observation form dated 11/1/24 at 4:26 PM completed by Nurse #1 revealed documentation that Resident #21 had obvious or likely cavity or broken natural teeth.Attempts at telephone interview with Nurse #1 were unsuccessful.A review of Resident #21's comprehensive care plan revealed a focus area dated as initiated on 11/1/24 and last revised on 7/18/25 for alteration in dentition. The goal was to maximize Resident #21's dentition and resolve to maximize independence…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-05-22 · 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 and staff interviews, the facility failed to immediately evaluate a resident for injury after a fall for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for falls (Resident #1). Nurse #1 observed Resident #1 on the floor and instead of immediately assessing the resident she went to find the resident's assigned nurse to complete an assessment. Findings included: Resident #1 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had multiple diagnoses, some of which included intellectual disabilities, dementia, and age-related osteoporosis. Documentation on a quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #1 was severely cognitively impaired. Resident #1 was also assessed as being able to go from a sitting to a standing position independently but required supervision or touching assistance, once standing, to walk 10 feet. Resident #1 was independent with the use of a manual wheelchair and she had a history of falls. Resident #1 was not coded as receiving anticoagulant or antiplatelet…

  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 · D2024-09-20 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolated
  Protect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, resident interview, staff interview, and police staff interview, the facility failed to protect the right of a resident to be free of misappropriation. The facility was aware Nurse Aide # 1 had a history of forgery and other crimes prior to hiring Nurse Aide # 1. While working at the facility, Nurse Aide # 1 took Resident # 1's money after telling Resident # 1 she could not pay her (NA #1's) personal bills and never reimbursed Resident # 1 as the resident thought would happen when giving Nurse Aide # 1 money. Nurse Aide # 1 also stole the resident's debit card number to pay a utility bill. This was for one (Resident # 1) of one resident reviewed for misappropriation. The findings included: Record review revealed Resident # 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses in part which included a history of stroke and rheumatoid arthritis. Review of Resident # 1's readmission Minimum Data Set assessment, dated 7/30/24, revealed the resident was cognitively intact. The resident 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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-08-08 · tag F0626 — isolated
  Permit a resident to return to the nursing home after hospitalization or therapeutic leave that exceeds bed-hold policy.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review and resident, family, staff, Long Term Care Ombudsman, and hospital Emergency Department (ED) Case Manager interviews, the facility failed to allow a resident (Resident #23) to return to the facility to the first available bed after he was transferred to the hospital and cleared by a psychiatric evaluation to return to the facility on 7/25/23. The facility refused readmission, and the resident remained in the in the hospital Emergency Department until 7/27/23 when the State Agency and Long Term Care Ombudsman intervened. This was for 1 of 2 residents whose discharge was reviewed. Findings included: Resident #23 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of dementia. A review of Resident #23's care plan revealed in part a focus area initiated on 4/17/23 related to Resident #23 experiencing agitation when he was brought out of his room. The goal was to avoid bringing Resident #23 out of his room. The intervention was that if Resident #23 needed to be brought out of…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-08-08 · tag F0700 — isolated
  Try different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, staff interviews, and record review the facility failed to attempt alternatives prior to installing siderails (also known as bedrails), complete siderail assessments, assess entrapment risk, review the risks and benefits of siderails with the resident /resident representative and obtain informed consent prior to siderail use for 2 of 2 residents (Resident #24, Resident #37) reviewed for siderails. Findings included: 1. Resident #24 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of hemiplegia (complete paralysis) and hemiparesis (partial muscle weakness) following cerebral infarction (stroke) affecting left non-dominant side. A review of Resident #24's electronic chart revealed no siderail screening. A screening titled Restraint and Adaptive equipment observation dated 5/30/24 was reviewed. The screening indicated Resident #24 did not use adaptive equipment. The observation was completed by the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON). A Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated…

  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 · F2023-05-11 · 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 and resident and staff interviews the facility's Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) Committee failed to maintain implemented procedures and monitor the interventions that the committee put into place following the 2/23/21 focused infection control and complaint investigation survey, the 1/27/22 recertification and complaint investigation survey and the 11/30/22 complaint investigation survey. This was for one deficiency in the area of F880 Infection Prevention and Control that was cited on the 2/23/21 focused infection control and complaint investigation survey, 2 deficiencies in the areas of F656 Develop and Implement Comprehensive Care Plan and F880 Infection Prevention and Control that were cited on the 1/27/22 recertification and complaint investigation survey and 1 deficiency in the area of F677 Activities of Daily Living Care that was cited on the 11/30/22 complaint investigation survey. These deficiencies were recited on the current recertification and complaint investigation survey of 5/11/23. The continued failure of the facility…

  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 · F2023-05-11 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespread
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review and staff interviews the facility failed to implement an infection surveillance plan for monitoring and tracking infections in the facility. This practice had the potential to affect 49 of 49 residents in the facility. Findings included: The facility's Infection Prevention and Control Surveillance policy reviewed on 4-6-23 documented the Infection Preventionist (IP) conducts surveillance of all infections among residents and partners including tracking and analysis of outbreaks of infections. The Infection Preventionist (IP) nurse was interviewed on 5-11-23 at 11:12am. The IP nurse discussed tracking and analyzing infections in the facility by using an approved tracking form. She explained the form was computerized, so she did not have a paper copy for review. After requesting the IP nurse retrieve the last three months of her tracking for infections on her computer for review, the IP nurse stated she did not have the information. She explained she had not tracked or analyzed any infections in the facility since her arrival in January 2023. The IP nurse also…

  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

“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.

Fines & penalties

$14,697 in federal fines across 2 penalties. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.

• $9,620 — penalty dated 2025-05-22
• $5,077 — penalty dated 2024-08-08
• Medicare payment denial — starting 2025-06-13 for 3 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 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 →

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

CMS files one row per role, so the 25 rows in the source record cover these 17 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.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

About 71% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $1.3M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 22% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2024). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in NC