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

Juniper Gardens Center for Nursing and Rehabilitat

4414 Wilkinson Blvd, Gastonia, NC 28056 · For profit - Corporation · 50 certified beds · (704) 824-5550 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (704) 824-5550 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
1 actual-harm citation2 immediate-jeopardy citations CMS recorded as corrected before the inspection ended (past non-compliance)$16,801 in federal fines1 Medicare payment denial
Insights

The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • it has 1 actual-harm citation
  • inspectors recorded 2 serious findings as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (17) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • the CMS record shows $16,801 in federal fines (most recent 2024-08-27)
  • its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
  • nursing-staff turnover (62%) runs well above the national median (45%)

One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.

A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.

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

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★ 4/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
2910 E Franklin Blvd Ste 1 · (704) 648-0460 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
3000 E Franklin Blvd · (704) 868-2095 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
Aldi1.1 mi
3201 E Franklin Blvd · (855) 955-2534 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Bob Bolick Park, 503 W 1st St · (704) 824-3518 · 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 2 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 3 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 1 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 1 to 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating3★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased18.2%15.6%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight5.4%7.2%5.4%typical
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.7%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection1.0%2.3%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms13.5%5.9%6.5%worse
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 injury2.8%3.5%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened5.8%18.3%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication24.2%21.3%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine97.0%94.1%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers10.4%5.5%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control16.6%20.7%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table15.3%14.0%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication1.6%1.4%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine98.0%78.1%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission22.1%22.9%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit10.3%12.9%12.0%better

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.

32.9% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 32 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

32.9%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
12.1%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
53.3%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.42U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.12hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.19hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.12hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 53.3% 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 30 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 0.42 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 72% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 12% 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 SNF32.9%CMS range 18.8–50.751.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF12.1%CMS range 8.3–17.510.7%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 discharge53.3%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 discharge53.3%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 discharge56.7%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 identified81.8%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting95.0%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 dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 worsened13.6%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.6%CMS range 3.8–15.67.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.091.02Oct 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

0.82
RN hours/ resident / day
0.87
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.65
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.34
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.79
RN hoursweekends
62.2%
Total nursing turnover
50.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 50 beds and averages 41.2 residents a day — about 82% occupied, or roughly 9 beds typically open. It usually has some room. 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 3.34 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.82 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.65 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.94 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.50 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.83 to 0.79 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 62% is well above 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 (2025-11-21)
7
at the previous standard inspection (2024-08-27)

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.

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

  • Immediate jeopardy · J2024-08-27 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, resident, staff, physician and contract transport company interviews, the facility's contracted transport driver (Driver #1) failed to leave Resident #12 in place for a clinical assessment of injury after a fall that occurred during transport. Resident #12 was being transported back from a medical appointment in a contract transport van while unsecured in her wheelchair. Driver #1 made a sudden stop which caused Resident #12 to fall forward out of her wheelchair onto the van floor. Driver #1 pulled the van off to the side of the road and transferred Resident #12 off the van floor back into her wheelchair and continued back to the facility. Driver #1 was not qualified to provide a comprehensive physical assessment to determine if the resident sustained any injuries. Upon arrival at the facility, Driver #1 did not notify facility staff of the resident's fall. Resident #12 notified staff of the fall in the van and was assessed by nursing staff and noted to have swelling and a skin tear 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Immediate jeopardy · J2024-08-27 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews with resident, staff, physician and the contract transport company's owner, the facility's contracted transport driver (Driver #1) failed to provide safe transportation when Resident #12's lap belt was not applied leaving her unsecured in her wheelchair. Resident #12 was being transported back from a medical appointment when Driver #1 made a sudden stop resulting in Resident #12 falling forward out of her wheelchair onto the van floor on her left knee and rolling onto her left side. Driver #1 pulled the van off to the side of the road and transferred Resident #12 off the van floor back into her wheelchair and continued back to the facility. Resident #12 had swelling and a skin tear to her left knee. A hospital CT (computed tomography) scan revealed Resident #12 had suffered a distal (away from the center of the body) left fracture to the femur (break in bone above left knee joint) due to her fall in the van. This deficient practice occurred for 1 of 3 sampled residents…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Actual harm · G2023-05-02 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolated
    Provide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to administer pain medication to 1 of 1 resident (Resident #97) reviewed for pain management when she complained of pain at a level of 9 on a scale of 0 to 10. The findings included: Resident #97 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included hypertension, diabetes mellitus and end stage renal disease. Resident #97's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed she was cognitively intact, required extensive to total assistance of 1 staff member with all activities of daily living except eating. The assessment also revealed Resident #97 received as needed pain medication for pain and non-verbal sounds of pain related to stage IV pressure ulcer on the resident's sacral region. Review of Resident #97's care plan dated 4/24/23 revealed a focus area for chronic pain. The interventions included evaluate the effectiveness of pain interventions, review for compliance, alleviating of…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-11-21 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her 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 resident, staff, and family interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents' rights to maintain dignity for 3 of 3 residents reviewed for dignity (Resident #33, Resident #41, and Resident #24). The findings included: 1. Resident #33 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included chronic pain, muscle weakness, and reduced mobility. The 5-day Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #33 was cognitively intact with no behaviors, had adequate vision and no issues with communicating. The MDS documented Resident #33 was frequently incontinent of urine and bowel and required substantial to max assistance with toileting. On 11/18/25 at 11:56 AM an interview was conducted with Resident #33. She stated there was a night shift (11:00 PM to 7:00 AM) Nurse Aide (NA) #1 who made her lay wet when she was incontinent. Resident #33 stated when she called before first rounds on night shift and informed NA #1 she needed an incontinence change, NA #1 told her, No…

    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 · D2025-11-21 · 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 observations, record review, staff and resident interviews the facility failed to ensure advance directive information was accurate throughout the medical record for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for advance directives (Resident #4).The findings included:Resident # 4 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted to the facility on [DATE].Review of Resident #4's electronic health record (EHR) revealed an active physician order dated [DATE] that stated Do Not Resuscitate (DNR).Resident #4's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #4 was cognitively intact.Further review of Resident #4's electronic health record revealed an active physician order dated [DATE] stated that he was a Full Code.Resident #4's advance directive care plan dated [DATE] revealed residents' code status to be Full Code.An observation conducted on [DATE] of the Advance Directives binder located at the nursing station revealed a yellow Do Not Resuscitate form dated [DATE] and indicated no expiration…

    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 · E2024-08-27 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — pattern
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when 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 observations, record review and staff interviews the facility failed to post cautionary and safety signage outside of resident rooms that indicated the use of oxygen for 4 of 4 residents (Resident #1, #6, #8, and #42) reviewed for respiratory care. The findings included: a. Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated Resident #1 was not coded for receiving oxygen. A review of Resident #1's physician orders revealed an order dated 1/26/24 for oxygen to be administered continuously via nasal cannula at 3 liters per minute (l/min). An observation on 8/19/24 at 4:03 PM revealed Resident #1 was lying in bed wearing a nasal cannula with oxygen being administered at 3 l/min. There was no cautionary or safety signage posted at the entrance to Resident #1's room to indicate oxygen was in use. An observation of Resident #1 conducted on 8/20/24 at 11:00 AM revealed she was sitting on the side of her bed with oxygen being administered…

    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 · E2024-08-27 · 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, resident, staff, Consultant Pharmacist, Nurse Practitioner, and Physician interviews, the facility failed to administer medications as ordered by the Physician that included Bosulif (medication for leukemia) and Olanzapine (an antipsychotic medication). This occurred for 2 of 5 residents (Resident #9 and Resident #13) reviewed for significant medication errors. Findings included: 1. Resident #9 was admitted to the facility 08/24/22 with a diagnosis including chronic myelocytic leukemia (cancer of white blood cells). Review of Resident #9's Physician orders revealed an order dated 01/20/23 for Bosulif 100 milligrams (mg) 2 tablets by mouth every day related to leukemia. Review of Resident #9's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed she was cognitively intact with no behaviors. Review of Resident #9's Medication Administration Records (MARs) from December 2023 through August 2024 revealed Bosulif was initialed by nursing staff as being administered as ordered. 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-08-27 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, record review, and staff interviews the facility failed to implement Special Droplet Contact Precautions when Nurse #1 and Nurse Aide (NA) #1 entered Resident #4's room without donning Personal Protective Equipment (PPE); failed to ensure staff implemented their infection control policy for hand hygiene when Nurse #2 failed to wear gloves during insulin administration and perform hand hygiene after insulin administration for Resident #28; and when Unit Manager #1 failed to perform hand hygiene after removing dirty gloves and before donning clean gloves during wound care for Resident #12. These failures occurred during a COVID-19 outbreak at the facility for 3 of 5 residents reviewed for infection control practices (Resident #4, Resident #28, Resident #12). Findings included: The Special Droplet Contact Precautions (SDCP) signage, with a revised date of 02/09/2022, noted staff should follow the instructions on the signage before entering the resident's room which included, All healthcare personnel must: 1) clean hands before entering and when leaving the room,…

    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 · D2024-08-27 · tag F0552 — isolated
    Ensure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
    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, staff, and responsible person (RP) interviews, the facility failed to notify the RP of a follow-up urologist appointment for a scheduled procedure for Resident #19. During Resident #19 urology appointment on 5/31/24, a follow-up recommendation for a cystoscopy (used to diagnose, monitor, and treat conditions affecting the bladder and urethra) procedure was recommended and scheduled for 6/04/24. Resident #19's RP was not notified of the recommendations for the scheduled cystoscopy on 6/04/24. This deficient practice affected 1 of 3 residents reviewed for notification (Resident #19). Findings included: Resident #19 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including obstructive and reflex uropathy (blockage preventing urine from draining properly and cause urine to back-up into kidneys), urinary retention, and use of indwelling catheter. Review of quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #19 was moderately cognitively impaired and assessed as having 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 Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-05-02 · tag F0641 — pattern
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record reviews and staff interviews, the facility failed to accurately code the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments in the areas of urinary catheter (Resident #97), discharge disposition (Resident #43), activities of daily living (Resident #29), and falls (Resident #24) for 4 of 18 residents reviewed for MDS accuracy. The findings included: 1. Resident #97 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included hypertension, end stage renal disease and diabetes mellitus. Resident #97 was observed on 04/30/23 at 1:09 PM sitting up in her wheelchair in her room and had an indwelling urinary catheter. Review of Resident #97's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], under Section H. Bladder and Bowel, H100 Appliance, the assessment was marked at A. Indwelling catheter due to the resident's urinary catheter. Under Section H300 Urinary Continence, the assessment was marked at 3. Always incontinent (no episodes of continent voiding) instead of 9. Not rated, resident had a catheter…

    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 · E2023-05-02 · 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, staff interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure leftover food items stored for use in the reach-in freezer were labeled, dated and sealed. The failure occurred in 1 of 3 cold storage units and had the potential to affect food served to residents. The findings included: An observation occurred on 04/30/23 at 12:10 PM with Dietary Aide #1, of the kitchen's reach-in freezer revealed the following leftover food items stored for use: - an opened undated bag half full of frozen chicken tenders - an opened undated bag half full of frozen diced chicken - two opened undated bags three-fourth full of frozen chicken breast - two opened undated bags half full of frozen chicken drumettes and wings An interview conducted with Dietary Aide #1 on 04/30/23 at 12:20 PM revealed all items in the reach in freezer should be sealed and have a label on them with the date the items were opened. An interview conducted with [NAME] #1 on 4/30/23 at 12:25 PM revealed all items in the reach in freezer should be sealed and have a label on them with the date the items were…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-05-02 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — pattern
    Set up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record reviews, resident and staff interviews, the facility's Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) Committee failed to maintain implemented procedures and monitor interventions previously put in place following the complaint investigation survey of 06/23/22 and a recertification survey of 07/14/21. The repeated deficiency was in the area of accuracy of assessments. The facility's continued failure during three Federal surveys showed a pattern of the facility's inability to sustain an effective QAA program. The findings included: This tag was cross referenced to: F-641: Based on record reviews and staff interviews, the facility failed to accurately code the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments in the areas of urinary catheter (Resident #97), discharge disposition (Resident #43), activities of daily living (Resident #29), falls (Resident #24) and antipsychotic medications (Resident #21) for 5 of 18 residents reviewed for MDS accuracy. During the complaint investigation of 6/23/22 the the facility failed to obtain a resident's weight within 30 days of the Minimum Data Set…

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

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-05-02 · tag F0554 — isolated
    Allow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident had been assessed to self-administer medications (Resident #8). This occurred for 1 out of 3 residents reviewed for medication administration. The findings included: Resident #8 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD and respiratory failure. Resident #8's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed she was cognitively intact and required set up assistance of one staff member for most activities of daily living (ADL). On 05/02/23 at 9:16 AM an observation was conducted of Nurse #1 preparing Resident #8's medication from the medication cart and put them into a cup. Nurse #1 then went into the room with the medication cup and the resident's Cyclosporine (immunosuppressant, used to increase tear production) eye drops. Nurse #1 then handed the medication to Resident #8. Resident #8 stated, I have already administered my eye drops 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-05-02 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, family and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide shaving of resident's face and clipping of toenails for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #40) reviewed for assistance with activities of daily living. The findings included: Resident #40 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted to the facility on [DATE]. His diagnoses included hypertension and non-Alzheimer's dementia. Review of Resident #40's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed he was moderately cognitively impaired and required total assistance of 2 staff with bathing and extensive assistance of 1 staff with personal hygiene and had impairment of both sides of upper and lower extremities. Review of the shower schedule for Resident #40 revealed he received showers on Wednesday and Saturday on 1st shift (7:00 AM to 3:00 PM). Review of Resident #40's care plan dated 03/23/23 revealed a focus area for his inability to complete activities of daily living care related to his…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • No harm found · C2025-11-21 · tag F0575 — widespread
    Post a list of names, addresses, and telephone numbers of all pertinent State agencies and advocacy groups and a statement that the resident may file a complaint with the State Survey Agency.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations and staff interviews, the facility failed to post a list of names, addresses (mailing and email) and telephone numbers of all required state agencies and advocacy groups, such as the State Survey Agency, Department of Social Services, the State Long Term Care Ombudsman Program and the resident advocacy network. These observations occurred on 3 of the 4 days of the onsite recertification survey.The findings included:On 11/18/2025 at 1:00 PM, 11/19/2025 at 9:50 AM and 11/20/25 at 10:00 AM, an observation of the facility (inclusive of all hallways) revealed no postings of name or contact information for the following: the local Department of Social Services, the State Long Term Care Ombudsman, State Survey Agency or the resident advocacy network.During the Resident Council meeting on 11/20/2025 at 10:31 AM, Resident Council attendees (Resident #4, Resident # 23, Resident #42, and Resident #53) stated they did not know who the local Ombudsman was or how to contact them and did not know how to contact the State Agency to file a complaint or where that information…

    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
  • No harm found · C2025-11-21 · tag F0577 — widespread
    Allow residents to easily view the nursing home's survey results and communicate with advocate agencies.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to display survey results in a location accessible to residents and the public. This deficient practice occurred for 4 out of 4 days of the survey.The findings included:During an initial tour of the facility on 11/18/25 at 1:00 PM, survey result signage was observed in a picture frame on a table behind the receptionist in the main lobby. The survey signage revealed the following statement: State Survey results are in the binder under this sign. Survey signage was not observed in any other area in the facility. No binder was observed under the signage.An observation on 11/19/25 at 11:00 AM revealed the survey results binder was not located in any other area of the facility. Further observation of the desk behind the receptionist continued to reveal no evidence of the survey results binder.An additional observation on 11/20/25 at 10:00 AM revealed the survey results binder was not located in any other area of the facility. Further observation of the desk behind the receptionist continued to reveal no evidence of…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • No harm found · Bcited before2024-08-27 · tag F0641 — pattern
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interviews the facility failed to accurately code the Minimum Data Set assessment (MDS) for oxygen use (Resident #1, #6, and #8) and hospice services (Resident #1 and Resident #4) for 4 of 5 residents reviewed for accuracy of assessments. The findings included: a. Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). A review of Resident #1's physician orders revealed an order dated 1/26/24 for oxygen to be administered continuously via nasal cannula at 3 liters per minute (lpm). A review of Resident #1's medical record indicated she was admitted to hospice services on 2/8/24. A review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated Resident #1 was not coded for receiving hospice services or oxygen. b. Resident #6 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included COPD, emphysema, and chronic respiratory failure. A review…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has plan of correction

“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

$16,801 in federal fines across 2 penalties. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.

  • $8,400 — penalty dated 2024-08-27
  • $8,401 — penalty dated 2024-08-27
  • Medicare payment denial — starting 2024-09-26 for 5 days

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

Part of a chain

This home belongs to ALLIANCE HEALTH GROUP — 12 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 3 of 51.5+1.5 vs chain
Health inspection 3 of 51.8+1.2 vs chain
Staffing 3 of 51.8+1.2 vs chain
Quality measures 2 of 52.2-0.2 vs chain
The other 11 homes this chain runs (chain average 1.5★, per CMS)

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

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
BRIDGE HOLDCO LLCOrganizationDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 07/16/2025
COALITION GROUP LLCOrganizationINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 07/16/2025
EMANUEL, YOSEFIndividualINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/16/2025
ALLIANCE HEALTH GROUP LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/16/2025
CHRISTOPHER, CASEYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/16/2025
TURBETT, TIMOTHYIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 07/16/2025

CMS files one row per role, so the 10 rows in the source record cover these 6 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.

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.

$5.2M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-5.2%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$764K
Related-party expense14% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 76%Medicare 7%Other / private 17%

About 76% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $764K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 14% 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. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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

$359per resident / day
operating cost
$10,921per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$341per 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 345307. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-11-21, 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