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

Woodlands Nursing & Rehabilitation Center

400 Pelt Drive, Fayetteville, NC 28301 · For profit - Corporation · 80 certified beds · (910) 822-0515 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (910) 822-0515 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
$4,709 in federal fines
Insights

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

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • the CMS record shows $4,709 in federal fines (most recent 2023-09-01)
  • about 21% 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.

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

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★★ 5/5 CMS
Urgent care / clinic
2409 Murchison Rd · (910) 488-4525 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
Walmart0.8 mi
3421 Murchison Rd · (910) 364-0955 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
3421 Murchison Rd · (910) 364-0956 · Call to confirm hours
Park
1922 McGougan Rd · 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 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 2 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 3 to 4 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 rating4★
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 increased9.0%15.6%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight4.5%7.2%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder2.1%0.7%0.9%worse
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection1.7%2.3%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.5%5.9%6.5%better
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.0%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury2.9%3.5%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened10.7%18.3%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication19.8%21.3%18.9%typical
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine98.6%94.1%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers5.6%5.5%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control32.8%20.7%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table15.4%14.0%17.1%typical
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%1.4%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine73.2%78.1%79.4%typical
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission24.6%22.9%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit11.3%12.9%12.0%typical
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.091.781.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.041.801.80better

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

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

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

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

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

44.6% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 40 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

44.6%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.7%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
35.9%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.35U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.13hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.16hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.06hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 35.9% 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 39 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 0.35 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 59% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 5% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. 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 SNF44.6%CMS range 31.2–58.451.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.7%CMS range 7.2–14.210.7%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 discharge35.9%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 discharge35.9%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 discharge20.5%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 identified98.2%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 worsened1.8%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 hospitalizationnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.021.02Oct 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

0.43
RN hours/ resident / day
0.74
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.52
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.69
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.17
RN hoursweekends
55.6%
Total nursing turnover
55.6%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 80 beds and averages 75.3 residents a day — about 94% occupied, or roughly 5 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.69 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.43 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.52 is at or above 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 3.48 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.78 on weekdays — 8% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.54 to 0.17 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 56% 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

2
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-08-08)
4
at the previous standard inspection (2024-05-07)

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.

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

  • Potential for harm · D2025-08-08 · 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 resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to accurately code the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment in the area of oxygen therapy for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for oxygen therapy (Resident #4).The findings included:Resident #4 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and dependence on supplemental oxygen. The MDS dated [DATE] indicated Resident #4 was cognitively intact and was not coded for oxygen therapy. The Care Plan, last revised 7/21/25, included the focus of requiring oxygen therapy with an intervention that specified to give medications as ordered by physician. An observation and interview with Resident #4 were conducted on 8/7/25 at 10:55 AM. He was observed lying in his bed with oxygen being administered via nasal canula tubing (a tube with nasal prongs that allows oxygen delivery from an oxygen source) which was connected to an oxygen concentrator. He was awake and alert. When asked if he knew…

    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 · D2025-08-08 · tag F0644 — isolated
    Coordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
    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 complete a Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) application for a resident with newly evident mental health diagnoses for 1 of 1 sampled resident reviewed for PASRR (Resident #62). The findings included:Resident #62 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including major depressive disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, and adjustment disorder with anxiety.The admission Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] had Resident #62 coded as cognitively intact and was not currently considered by the state level II PASRR process to have serious mental illness.A review of the North Carolina Medicaid Uniform Screening Tool (NC MUST) for PASRR screenings dated 01/26/2010 revealed a negative PASRR level I determination.An interview with the Social Worker was conducted on 08/08/2025 at 11:15 AM. She stated Resident #62 did not have any mental health diagnoses in 2010 when the PASRR level I was completed but she did have the diagnoses…

    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 · E2024-05-07 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — pattern
    Ensure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interviews the facility failed to administer significant medications to 4 out of 16 residents (Resident #1, #18, #21, and #48) reviewed for medication administration. The facility also failed to follow medication administration guidelines for not crushing certain medications for 1 out of 16 residents reviewed for medication administration (Resident #42). Findings included: 1a) Resident #1 was admitted originally into the facility 01/31/22 and was readmitted on [DATE] with the diagnoses of cerebral infarction, chronic systolic congestive heart failure, hypothyroidism, hypertensive heart and chronic kidney disease with heart failure, epilepsy, and type 2 diabetes mellitus. A review of Resident #1's quarterly Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE]included that she is severely cognitively impaired, has diagnoses of heart failure, diabetes mellitus, stroke, dementia, seizure disorder, and schizophrenia. It further revealed that she had received insulin injections on 7 days and was taking high…

    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 · E2024-05-07 · tag F0887 — pattern
    Educate residents and staff on COVID-19 vaccination, offer the COVID-19 vaccine to eligible residents and staff after education, and properly document each resident and staff member's vaccination status.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and staff interviews the facility failed to maintain documentation of current Covid-19 vaccination status, eligibility screening, education, and offering of Covid-19 vaccination for facility staff. The failures regarding education, offering the vaccine, and maintaining records were found for 4 of 12 facility staff (Staff #1, Staff #2, Staff #3, and Staff #4) reviewed for infection control. The findings included: Facility Covid-19 Staff Vaccination Policy last revised 8/2023 indicated all newly hired employees will be offered the Covid-19 Vaccine. Current employees will be offered the vaccine when there is a change in the vaccine content or if they previously refused and now would like to obtain the vaccine. The facility Staff Vaccination Policy also indicated a master tracker would be created to list all current staff who routinely enter the facility and updated on an ongoing basis as new staff are onboarded. The tracker will include vaccination status and proof of vaccination will be maintained in a secured location. Review of facility records revealed Staff…

    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 · D2024-05-07 · tag F0582 — isolated
    Give residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide a CMS-10123 (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services) Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC) at least two days prior to discharge from Medicare part A services for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #127). The findings included: Resident #127 was admitted to the facility under skilled Medicare Part A services to receive physical, occupational and speech therapy on 11/02/2023. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated the resident's cognition was intact. She was dependent on staff for eating, toileting and personal hygiene. Review of the Physical Therapy discharge summary note indicated the date of services started on 11/03/2023 until 11/22/2023. Review of the Occupational Therapy discharge summary note indicated the date of services started on 11/03/2023 until 11/23/2023. A review of the medical record revealed a CMS-10123 NOMNC letter was issued, and the Responsible Party (RP) was notified on 11/28/2023…

    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 · D2024-05-07 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolated
    Ensure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review, staff, pharmacist, and Nurse Practitioner (NP) interviews the facility failed to respond to the consultant pharmacist's recommendations for 1 out of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications (Resident #42). Findings include: Resident #42 was admitted into the facility on 3/11/24 with multiple diagnoses including atrial fibrillation (an irregular rapid heart rate that commonly causes poor blood flow), gastroesophageal reflux disease, and arthritis. A review of Resident #42's admission Physician orders for March 2024 included the following: Cardizem Controlled Delivery 120 milligrams (mg) daily, enteric coated aspirin 81 mg daily, Protonix delayed release 40 mg tablet daily, Tylenol 8 hour extended release one tablet every 8 hours as needed for pain, and pentoxifylline extended release 400 mg tablet twice daily. A review of Resident #42's Pharmacy Consultant review dated 3/21/24 included the following: the electronic medical record indicates medications are crushed. Please consider the following alternatives: 1) Change Cardizem CD 120 milligram (mg)…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-09-01 · tag F0660 — isolated
    Plan the resident's discharge to meet the resident's goals and 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 interview, Physician interview, and Responsible Party interview the facility failed to implement a discharge planning process that identified changes resulting in modifications to a resident's discharge plan for one (Resident # 1) of three residents reviewed for discharge. The facility failed to follow up on a pending x-ray result before discharging a resident home. When the results came in after the resident was discharged , they showed the resident had a fracture. The findings included: Resident # 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident had diagnoses which in part included dementia, hypertension, diabetes, a history of metabolic encephalopathy, and debility. Resident # 1's care plan, dated 7/13/23, noted the plan was for Resident # 1 to discharge home after therapy was completed. Resident # 1's admission Minimum Data Set assessment, dated 7/21/23, coded the resident as cognitively impaired. She was assessed to need extensive assistance with her transfers and…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · E2022-12-01 · tag F0742 — pattern
    Provide the appropriate treatment and services to a resident who displays or is diagnosed with mental disorder or psychosocial adjustment difficulty, or who has a history of trauma and/or post-traumatic stress disorder.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, observations, and interviews with resident and staff, the facility failed to ensure residents diagnosed with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) had person-centered care plans developed with individualized approaches that direct staff on how to care for their assessed needs for 2 of 3 residents (Resident #24 and Resident #52) reviewed for PTSD. The findings included: 1. Resident #24 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with multiple diagnoses that included depression and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). A review of the Trauma-Informed Care and Diverse Resident admission Assessment. dated 03/10/2021 revealed Resident#24 was identified with a traumatic life altering circumstances of war. The annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #24's cognition was intact. He had no behaviors and no rejection of care. A review of Resident #24's care plan revised on 09/16/22. Revealed Resident #24 was not care planned for individualized approaches related to her…

    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 · E2022-12-01 · 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 interviews with facility staff, the facility failed to date opened food items stored for use in the reach-in refrigerator and to discard foods past their use by date for 1 of 1 reach-in refrigerator. This practice had the potential to affect foods served to the residents. The findings included: On 11/28/22 at 10:36 AM an observation of the of the reach-in refrigerator was conducted with the Dietary Manager. The observation revealed a plastic container of what appeared to be left over pudding unlabeled and there was no date or time noted, and a cheese sandwich unlabeled with no date. There was also a plastic container of leftover sliced mixed fruit dated 11/17/22 and peaches with date of 11/17/22. On 11/28/22 at 10:50 AM the Dietary Manager stated food items that did not contain a label should have been labeled properly. She added the items past seven days old should have been discarded by the dietary staff. The Dietary Manager also continued to explain that staff had called out the weekend and one of cooks had quit so someone had forgot to…

    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 · D2022-12-01 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interviews the facility failed to have code status in the medical record for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for code status (Resident #46). Findings included: Resident #46 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included anemia, coronary artery disease, heart failure and hypertension. Review of Resident #46' significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident's cognition was moderately impaired. An interview with Resident #46 was conducted on 11/28/2022 at 11:29AM. The resident indicated she did not recall any staff member reviewing code status with her. A review of Resident #46's physician orders for the month of November 2022 revealed no order for code status. An interview with Nurse #1 was conducted on 11/30/22 at 9:20 AM. She stated Resident #46's code status should be in the electronic medical record. Resident #46's electronic record was reviewed with Nurse #1, and she indicated the code status should be at the top of the…

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

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

Fines & penalties

$4,709 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $4,709 — penalty dated 2023-09-01

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 LIBERTY SENIOR LIVING — 37 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 4 of 52.8+1.2 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 53.1+0.9 vs chain
Staffing 3 of 52.2+0.8 vs chain
Quality measures 3 of 53.0≈ chain avg
The other 36 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.8★, per CMS)
1 of 5Liberty Commons Nursing and Rehabilitation CenterWhiteville, NC 1 of 5Louisburg Healthcare & Rehabilitation CenterLouisburg, NC 1 of 5Mary Gran Nursing CenterClinton, NC 1 of 5Oak Forest Health and RehabilitationWinston-Salem, NC 1 of 5Woodhaven Nursing CenterLumberton, NC 2 of 5Highland House Rehabilitation and HealthcareFayetteville, NC 2 of 5Liberty Commons Nursing & Rehabilitation Center ofBenson, NC 2 of 5Liberty Commons Nursing and Rehabilitation CenterSanford, NC 2 of 5Liberty Commons Rehabilitation CenterWilmington, NC 2 of 5Pavilion Health Center at BrightmoreCharlotte, NC 2 of 5Pinehurst Healthcare & Rehabilitation CenterPinehurst, NC 2 of 5Pisgah Manor Health Care CenterCandler, NC 2 of 5Roxboro Healthcare & Rehab CenterRoxboro, NC 2 of 5Royal Park Rehabilitation & Health CenterMatthews, NC 2 of 5The Foley Center at Chestnut RidgeBlowing Rock, NC 2 of 5The OaksWinston-Salem, NC 3 of 5Bermuda Commons Nursing and Rehabilitation CenterAdvance, NC 3 of 5Elizabethtown Healthcare & Rehab CenterElizabethtown, NC 3 of 5Liberty Commons Nsg and Rehab Ctr of Rowan CountySalisbury, NC 3 of 5Liberty Commons Nursing & Rehab Center of SouthporSouthport, NC 3 of 5Shoreland Health Care and Retirement Center IncWhiteville, NC 3 of 5Silver BluffCanton, NC 3 of 5Southwood Nursing and RetirementClinton, NC 3 of 5Summerstone Health and Rehabilitation CenterKernersville, NC 3 of 5Warren Hills Nursing CenterWarrenton, NC 4 of 5Briar Creek Health CenterCharlotte, NC 4 of 5Capital Nursing and Rehabilitation CenterRaleigh, NC 4 of 5Inn at Quail Haven VillagePinehurst, NC 4 of 5Liberty Commons Nursing & Rehabilitation Center ofBurlington, NC 4 of 5Liberty Commons Nursing and Rehabilitation CenterWeldon, NC 4 of 5Liberty Healthcare Services of Golden Years NursinFalcon, NC 4 of 5The Preserve At Fairfield GladeCrossville, TN 4 of 5Three Rivers Health and Rehabilitation CenterWindsor, NC 4 of 5Westfield Rehabilitation and Health CenterSanford, NC 5 of 5Parkview Health and Rehabilitation CenterChapel Hill, NC 5 of 5Yadkin Nursing and Care CenterYadkinville, NC

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
LIBERTY LONG TERM CARE LLCOrganizationDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 04/04/2025
JOHN A MCNEILL JR 2012 IRRV TROrganizationINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 04/29/2025
LIBERTY HEALTHCARE GROUP LLCOrganizationINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 04/29/2025
RONALD B. AND CYNTHIA J. MCNEILL 2013 IRREVOCABLE TRUSTOrganizationINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 04/29/2025
MCNEILL, JOHNIndividualINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 04/29/2025
MCNEILL, RONALDIndividualINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 04/29/2025
CALCUTT, JOSEPHIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/29/2025
MILLER, ROBERTIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/29/2025
WILSON, JEFFREYIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/29/2025
KHURANA, RAJESHIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/20/2026
PATE, SANDRAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/20/2026
MCNEILL, ROBERTIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/20/2026
OLIVER, ANNAIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/20/2026
PURVIS, JENNYIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/20/2026
JOHN A MCNEILL JR 2014 IRREVOCABLE TRUSTOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 04/29/2025
LIBERTY HEALTHCARE PROPERTIES OF WOODLANDS LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 04/29/2025
LIBERTY REAL PROPERTIES IV LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 04/29/2025
LONG TERM CARE MANAGEMENT SERVICES LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 04/29/2025
RONALD B AND CYNTHIA J MCNEIL 2014 IRREVOCABLE TRUSTOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 04/29/2025

CMS files one row per role, so the 28 rows in the source record cover these 19 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.

9 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.

$10.3M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-4.1%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$2.2M
Related-party expense21% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 47%Medicare 5%Other / private 48%

This home reported $2.2M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 21% 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

$320per resident / day
operating cost
$9,723per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$307per 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 345481. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-08-08, 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