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

Courtland Terrace

2300 Aberdeen Boulevard, Gastonia, NC 28054 · Non profit - Corporation · 77 certified beds · (704) 834-4800 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (704) 834-4800 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 10 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.

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
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (29% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity

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) 4 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 3 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★ 4/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
2290 Remount Rd · (704) 316-4979 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
425 Cox Rd · (704) 691-6002 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
Aldi1.1 mi
3201 E Franklin Blvd · (855) 955-2534 · Call to confirm hours
Park
1624 Spencer Mountain Rd · (704) 824-3461 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
711 Mt Hebron Church Rd

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 2 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 4 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 4 to 5 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 rating5★
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 increased35.8%15.6%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight3.8%7.2%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.4%0.7%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection4.7%2.3%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms2.7%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 injury5.1%3.5%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened31.1%18.3%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication25.2%21.3%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine93.8%94.1%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers0.8%5.5%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control26.5%20.7%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table16.8%14.0%17.1%typical
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.9%1.4%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine98.1%78.1%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission27.3%22.9%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit15.1%12.9%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.211.781.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.301.801.80better

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.

69.5% 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 365 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

69.5%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
13.2%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
74.8%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.76U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.42hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.28hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.06hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 74.8% 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 107 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 0.76 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 93% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 48% 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 SNF69.5%CMS range 64.4–75.151.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF13.2%CMS range 10.9–15.810.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024worse than U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge74.8%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 discharge74.8%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 discharge70.1%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified97.0%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 setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge98.0%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 worsened2.3%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 hospitalization6.9%CMS range 4.8–10.07.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.841.02Oct 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

0.56
RN hours/ resident / day
1.42
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.27
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.25
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.26
RN hoursweekends
28.9%
Total nursing turnover
40.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 77 beds and averages 71.7 residents a day — about 93% 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 4.25 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.56 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.27 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 3.32 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.63 on weekdays — 28% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.68 to 0.26 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 29% 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

4
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-02-13)
1
at the previous standard inspection (2024-10-31)

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.

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 · Ecited before2026-02-13 · 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 and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure thawed, raw chicken available for use was labeled with a use by date in 1 of 4 walk-in refrigerators. This practice had the potential to affect food served to residents. Findings included:An observation of the walk-in refrigerator in the main kitchen was conducted on 2/10/26 at 10:18 AM with the Kitchen Operations Manager. At the front of the walk-in refrigerator on the bottom shelf was an opened 20-pound case with one package of raw chicken and one 20-pound case of raw chicken with a sticker that read use first. There was no use by date to specify when the chicken should not be used. The delivery dates on the cases was 2/3/26.During an interview on 2/10/26 at 10:18 AM, the Kitchen Operations Manager revealed when the raw chicken was delivered on 2/3/26 it was frozen and now it had thawed and was ready for use. He revealed the system in place was to rotate frozen raw chicken using a First In First Out policy and explained when raw chicken was delivered it was frozen and placed in the back of the walk-in…

    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 · D2026-02-13 · 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 reviews, Responsible Party (RP) interview, and staff interviews the facility failed to code the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment accurately in the area of Hospice Care for 1 of 7 residents reviewed for MDS accuracy (Resident #56). The findings included:Resident #56 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included chronic ischemic heart disease and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Review of Resident #56's electronic medical record (EMR) revealed a Hospice admission Agreement was signed by Resident #56's RP on 09/08/2025. Resident #56 transitioned to hospice services on 09/08/2025.Review of Resident #56's electronic medical record (EMR) revealed Resident #56's care plan was revised on 09/08/2025 and included the following area of focus, in part: Resident requires Hospice Care and will be kept comfortable through next review.Review of Resident #56's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] did not indicate Resident #56 was receiving Hospice care.An…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-02-13 · 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, and psychiatrist interview the facility failed to refer one resident with a new mental health diagnosis for a Level II Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) evaluation for 1 of 1 resident for PASRR (Resident #10).The findings included:Review of Resident #10's medical record revealed Resident #10 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A PASRR level I was completed prior to Resident #10's admission with a recommendation to resubmit paperwork for PASRR level II if a new mental health diagnosis was suspected or if there was a significant change in the resident's condition.Review of the electronic medical record (EMR) revealed Resident #10 was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) on 09/30/2025. There was no evidence in the medical record that a request was submitted for a Level II PASRR evaluation.An interview with Resident #10's psychiatrist was conducted on 02/12/2016 at 2:00 PM. The psychiatrist stated when Resident #10 was admitted to 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 Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-13 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, observations, and resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to secure medications left unattended in a resident's room for 1 of 1 resident reviewed medication storage (Resident #90). Findings included:Resident #90 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including atrial fibrillation and hypertension.Review of Resident #90's active physician orders included apixaban (anticoagulant) 5 milligrams (mg) twice a day started on 2/3/26, metoprolol (antihypertensive) extended release 25 mg with directions to hold for systolic blood pressure (SBP) less than 100 or diastolic blood pressure (DBP) less than 50 or a heart rate less than 50 started on 2/3/26, and diltiazem hydrochloride (antiarrhythmic) extended release 300 mg with directions to hold for SBP less than 120 or DBP less than 60 started on 2/3/26. There was no active physician's order for dextromethorphan/guaifenesin (analgesic/decongestant) 600 mg.During an observation on 2/11/26 at 8:29 AM, a clear resealable…

    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 · D2024-10-31 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolated
    Keep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, Guardian, Podiatrist, and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide personal privacy for Resident #28 when the Podiatrist cut her toenails in the facility's day room visible to other residents. This deficient practice was for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for personal privacy (Resident #28). The findings included: Resident #28 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia with mood disturbance and cognitive communication deficit. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed that Resident #28 was severely cognitively impaired and exhibited no behaviors or rejections of care during the assessment period. An observation conducted in the facility's day room on 10/30/24 at 12:00 PM revealed there were 10 residents seated at tables around the room. Resident #28 sat in her wheelchair in the center of the room and the Podiatrist sat on the floor in front of her and cut her toenails. There was no privacy curtain or shield in…

    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 · Ecited before2023-06-28 · 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 observation, record review and staff interview the facility failed to maintain the kitchen equipment clean and in a sanitary condition to prevent cross contamination by failing to clean the undershelf of one of one steamtables. The findings included: Review of the Equipment Cleaning Log week of June 18th there was no mention of the steamtable under splash area to be cleaned. An observation of the steamtable undershelf on 6/27/23 at 10:04 AM revealed the steamtable to have splatters of dark black dried food particles covering the under-splash area of the top shelf directly above the food wells. During the meal temperature observation on 6/28/23 at 8:28 AM revealed the 5 well steamtable was observed on and pans of food were in the steamtable ready to serve. The steamtable was observed to have splatters of dark black dried food particles covering the under-splash area of the top shelf directly above the steaming food wells. In an interview on 6/28/23 at 8:39 AM the Operations Manager stated the steamtable should have been cleaned. In an interview on 6/28/23 at 8:45 AM 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-06-28 · 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 record review and staff interviews the facility failed to develop care plans in the areas of suprapubic catheter (Resident #45) and pressure ulcers (Residents #4, #9, and #5) for 4 of 4 residents reviewed for care planning. The findings included: 1. Resident #45 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) obstructive uropathy. A physician note dated 11/3/22 indicated an indwelling urinary catheter had been placed this day. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] revealed Resident #45 had an indwelling urinary catheter. Review of the Resident #45's Comprehensive Care Plan dated 11/8/22 contained no information or interventions regarding suprapubic catheter care. An interview was conducted with the Minimum Data Nurse on 6/28/23 at 4:32 PM. She revealed Resident #45's catheter should have been care planned. An interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON) 6/28/23 at 4:40 PM. The DON stated Resident #45's care plan chould…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-06-28 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation and staff interview the facility failed to discard an expired medications for 1 of 1 medication room reviewed for medication storage. The findings included: 1.During an observation of the medication room for medication storage on 6/28/23 at 12:02 PM, 1 multidose vial of opened and accessed Tuberculin Purified Diluted (Aplisol) was in the medication refrigerator. The vial had an opened date of 4/15/23. A review of the manufacturer ' s instruction label on the box indicated the medication should be discarded 30 days from the date medication was opened. During an interview with the Director of Nursing on 6/28/23 at 12:10 PM, she stated it was the night shift nurses responsibility to check the refrigerators and medication carts for expired medication. The DON stated the expired medications should have been discarded or returned to the pharmacy. 2. An observation of the medication storage room conducted on 6/28/23 at 12:02 PM revealed 2 bags of Vancomycin 750 milligrams(mg)/ in 250 milliliters (ml) of normal saline with an expiration date of 6/12/23 was in 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-06-28 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — isolated
    Set up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record reviews and staff interviews, the facility's Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) Committee failed to maintain implemented procedures and monitor interventions the committee put in place following the recertification and complaint survey conducted on 7/9/21. This was for a recited deficiency on the current recertification and complaint survey in the area of development and implementation of comprehensive care plans. The continued failure during two surveys shows a pattern of the facility's inability to sustain an effective QAA program. The findings included: This tag is cross referenced to: F656: Based on record review and staff interviews the facility failed to develop care plans in the areas of suprapubic catheter (Resident #45) and pressure ulcers (Residents #4, #9, and #5) for 4 of 4 residents reviewed for care planning. During the recertification survey on 7/9/21 the facility was cited for failing to develop a comprehensive care plan in the areas of indwelling catheter usage and anticoagulant, diuretic, and opioid medication usage. An interview was complete on…

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

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • No harm found · C2023-06-28 · tag F0623 — widespread
    Provide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to provide written notice of reason for discharge to hospital to the resident and/or resident representatives and to provide the Ombudsman with a copy of the written notice for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for hospitalization. (Resident #9, Resident #39) The findings included: 1. Resident #9 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE]. A review of the 5 Day Medicare Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #9 was cognitively intact. Review of a physician ' s order dated 4/1/23 revealed an order to send to hospital for follow up of abnormal critical lab and abnormal computed tomography (CT) imaging. The medical record included no evidence that Resident #9 or her resident representative were provided with written notice that included the reason for discharge to the hospital on 4/1/23. During an interview with Resident #9 on 6/26/23 at 9:18 AM. the resident indicated she had no recollection of receiving written notice that explained the reason…

    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

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

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
CAROMONT HEALTH SERVICES INCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF100%since 02/20/2025
CAROMONT HEALTH INCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF100%since 02/20/2025
AUSTELL, JASONIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2022
BOYD, DANIELIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2023
CASH, JEFFREYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2018
CONNER, TIMOTHYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2025
DAVIS, JOSEPHIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 02/22/2016
EFIRD, TIMOTHYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 08/31/2021
FLOYD, PEARLIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2015
HINTON, BENJAMINIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2022
HOVIS, WILLIAMIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2019
MCGRAW, JEFFREYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2023
PATEL, SHIDDHIIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2026
PAYSEUR, DAVIDIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 06/26/2017
PEAK, JANIEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2021
STEWART, FRANKIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2020
PEEK, KENNETHIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 05/15/2017
ADCOCK, GEORGEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 04/09/2018
BOOKER, WILLIAMIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 12/02/2024
CANIPE, BETHIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 08/15/2023
CRAIG, KATHERINEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 08/24/2025
DAVIS, TODDIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 08/01/2010
DYKSTERHOUSE, ANDREWIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 07/01/2024
FLOWERS, ERICAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 01/15/2024
HICKMAN, LEIGHIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 02/17/2020
LANG, ROBINIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 12/31/2018
MADDOX, CRYSTALIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/29/2024
MURPHY, FRANKIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 02/19/2018
O'CONNOR, DAVIDIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 07/23/2007
THORSELL, CATHYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 07/01/2022
WHARTON, DANNYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 12/11/2017
YOUNG, BEVERLYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/18/2025
ACCESS DENTAL CAREOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 07/01/2025

CMS files one row per role, so the 40 rows in the source record cover these 33 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

3 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.

$10.9M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-3.1%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$42K
Related-party expense0% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 53%Medicare 28%Other / private 19%

This home reported $42K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

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

$653per resident / day
operating cost
$19,854per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$633per 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 345350. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-02-13, 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