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

Heartland Living & Rehab at the Moses H Cone Memor

1131 North Church Street, Greensboro, NC 27401 · For profit - Corporation · 107 certified beds · (336) 358-5100 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (336) 358-5100 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 13 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

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

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (36% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
Worth asking about
  • its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)

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

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

4/5
CMS overall
4 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 3 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 2 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★ 3/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
(336) 832-4400 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
1126 N Church St · (336) 274-7211 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
1403 Yanceyville St · (336) 763-5007 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Audubon0.4 mi
111 Tankersley Dr · 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 2 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 2 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 2 to 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

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

Overall rating3★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased17.8%15.6%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight6.3%7.2%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.2%0.7%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%2.3%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms7.1%5.9%6.5%typical
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 injury3.4%3.5%3.3%typical
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened20.9%18.3%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication14.1%21.3%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%94.1%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers9.7%5.5%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control34.6%20.7%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table15.8%14.0%17.1%typical
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.6%1.4%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine93.5%78.1%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission24.1%22.9%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit22.6%12.9%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.611.781.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days3.401.801.80worse

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.

50.1% 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 92 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

50.1%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.9%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
55.3%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.60U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.21hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.22hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.17hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 55.3% 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 38 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 0.60 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 88% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 42% 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 SNF50.1%CMS range 40.5–61.851.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.9%CMS range 7.0–16.010.7%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 discharge55.3%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 discharge55.3%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 discharge52.6%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 identified100.0%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 setting93.9%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 worsened4.2%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 hospitalization8.3%CMS range 4.4–13.97.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.911.02Oct 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

0.21
RN hours/ resident / day
0.68
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.90
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.79
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.11
RN hoursweekends
35.8%
Total nursing turnover
28.6%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 107 beds and averages 91.9 residents a day — about 86% occupied, or roughly 15 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.79 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.21 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.90 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.48 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.92 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.25 to 0.11 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 36% is below the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

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

Inspection trend

2
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-04-30)
3
at the previous standard inspection (2025-02-26)

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.

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

  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-30 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
    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 Responsible Party and staff interviews, the facility failed to dispose of a urinary catheter drainage bag left on the resident's sink for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #94) on 1 of 3 halls reviewed for clean, comfortable, and homelike environment. The findings included:Review of Residents #94's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident was moderately cognitively impaired and was coded for use of an indwelling urinary catheter.Interview and observation with Residents #94's Responsible Party (RP) on 04/27/26 at 11:40 AM revealed concerns of cleanliness of Resident #94's bathroom. An observation conducted at the same time revealed a leg bag (a small, wearable urine collection bag used to collect urine from an indwelling catheter) laying on the resident's bathroom counter next to the sink. There was observation of approximately 50 milliliters (ml) in the catheter leg bag, but no signs of urine on the sink. The RP indicated the leg bag had…

    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 · D2026-04-30 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    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 resident, staff, and Nurse Practitioner interviews, the facility failed to administer oxygen as specified in the physician order for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for oxygen therapy (Resident #53 and Resident #35).Findings included: 1. Resident #53 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia (low levels of oxygen in body tissue which are common with chronic heart and lung conditions and causes symptoms like confusion, restlessness, difficulty breathing rapid heart rate and bluish skin), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and hypertension. Review of Resident #53's care plan dated 03/12/26 revealed the resident required oxygen at times or continuously. The resident was at risk for signs and symptoms of respiratory distress, dry or bloody nose, irritated skin around the ears from tubing or if mask is work, possible irritation round the mouth, increased fatigue, headaches. The goal was for Resident #53 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 · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-02-26 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — pattern
    Have a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to schedule a Registered Nurse (RN) for at least eight consecutive hours a day, seven days a week for 9 of 91 days reviewed for sufficient nurse staffing (September 2024, October 2024, November 2024). Findings included: Review of the facility's Posted Nurse Staffing for September of 2024 revealed there was not a Registered Nurse scheduled for at least 8 hours a day on September 6, 2024, September 7, 2024, September 21, 2024, and September 22, 2024. The Posted Nurse Staffing for October 2024 was reviewed and there was not a Registered Nurse scheduled for at least 8 hours a day on October 6, 2024 and October 20, 2024. The November Posted Nurse Staffing was also reviewed and there was not a Registered Nurse scheduled for at least 8 hours daily for November 3, 2024, November 16, 2024, and November 17, 2024. During an interview with the Director of Nursing on 2/25/2025 at 1:19 pm she stated she was responsible for the nurse staffing schedule in September 2024, October 2024, and November 2024. The Director of Nursing stated…

    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.

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-26 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure walls in a resident's room did not have stains (room [ROOM NUMBER]A) and failed to ensure a call light panel was securely attached to the wall behind a resident's bed (room [ROOM NUMBER]B) for 2 of 4 rooms on 1 of 3 halls (100 hall) reviewed for a safe, clean and homelike environment. Findings included: 1. On 2/23/2025 at 10:39 am the wall beside the bed in room [ROOM NUMBER]A had two 4-centimeters by 3-centimeters dried, dark brown stains. During observations on 2/24/2025 at 9:59 am and on 2/25/25 at 8:57 am the two 4-centimeters by 3-centimeters dried, dark brown stains remained on the wall beside the bed in room [ROOM NUMBER]A. On 2/25/2025 at 9:18 am Nurse Aide #2 was interviewed, and she stated she was assigned to room [ROOM NUMBER]A and housekeeping was responsible for cleaning the walls. Nurse #1 was interviewed on 2/25/2025 at 9:00 am and she stated room [ROOM NUMBER]A was on her assignment but had not…

    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 · D2025-02-26 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, staff interviews, and record review, the facility failed to keep a urinary catheter bag and its tubing from touching the floor to reduce the risk of infection for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #55) reviewed with a urinary catheter. The findings included: Resident #55 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her cumulative diagnoses included obstructive uropathy (a condition where the flow of urine is blocked, leading to a buildup of urine in the urinary tract). Resident #55's care plan included an area of focus related to the resident having an indwelling urinary catheter in place (Initiated on 2/6/25). An admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #55 had moderately impaired cognition. No behaviors nor rejection of care were reported. The assessment indicated Resident #55 required supervision or touching assistance for eating and personal hygiene; partial to moderate assistance for sit to stand and chair/bed to chair transfers; and substantial to maximum…

    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 · E2023-09-28 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — pattern
    Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
    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, interviews with the staff and consultant pharmacist, and record reviews, the facility failed to acquire a medication (a combination calcium and vitamin D supplement) ordered for administration resulting in multiple doses of the prescribed medication being missed for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #61) observed for medication administration. The findings included: Resident #61 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her cumulative diagnoses included diabetes and heart failure. On 9/27/23 at 8:15 AM, Medication (Med) Aide #2 was observed as she prepared and administered 11 oral medications to Resident #61. At that time, the med aide reported this resident's calcium and vitamin D combination tablet was not available on the med cart for administration because it had not been delivered by the pharmacy. A follow-up interview was conducted on 9/27/23 at 11:28 AM with Med Aide #2. During the interview, the med aide confirmed Resident #61's calcium / vitamin D tablets had been previously supplied by…

    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 · E2023-09-28 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
    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 observations, interviews with staff and the consultant pharmacist, and record reviews, the facility failed to: 1) Label medications with the minimum information required, including the first and last name of the resident on 3 of 3 medication (med) carts observed (the 300 Hall Nurse's Med Cart, the 100 Hall Nurse's Med Cart, and the 300 Hall Med Aide's Med Cart); 2) Store medications in accordance with the manufacturer's storage instructions on 2 of 3 med carts (300 Hall Nurse's Med Cart and the 300 Hall Med Aide Med Cart); and 3) Discard an expired medication on 1 of 3 med carts observed (the 300 Hall Med Aide's Med Cart). The findings included: 1-a. An observation was conducted on [DATE] at 3:58 PM of the 300 Hall Nurse's medication (med) cart in the presence of Nurse #3. The observation revealed the following medications stored on the med cart failed to be labeled with the minimum information required: --An opened, manufacturer's bottle of 0.4 milligrams (mg) nitroglycerin tablets (a medication used…

    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 · Dcited before2023-09-28 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
    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 interviews, staff interviews and observations, the facility failed to provide a room free of a strong smell of urine. This was evident in 1 of 5 rooms reviewed for clean, homelike environment (room [ROOM NUMBER]). Findings included: Resident #10 was admitted in the facility on 12/13/13 with the most recent readmission on [DATE]. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #10 was cognitively intact. Resident #10 was independent with toilet use and required oversight, encouragement or cueing with personal hygiene with one-person physical assist. Resident #10 required one-person physical assist with bathing with physical help limited to transfer only. A review of Resident #10's care plan dated 4/20/23 revealed Resident #10 Resident sometimes resisted/refused care which may compromise health/ safety/ well-being. Often refused baths and personal hygiene care. Also sometimes refused to allow laundry to wash dirty clothes or allow staff to move dirty…

    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 · D2023-09-28 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to accurately code the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment in the areas of Hospice/End of life care (Resident #74) and discharge location (Resident #85). This occurred for 2 of 23 residents reviewed for accuracy of assessments. The findings included: 1. Resident #74 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a cumulative diagnosis which included heart failure and a history of a cerebrovascular accident (stroke). The resident's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) was dated 5/3/23. A review of the resident's electronic medical record (EMR) revealed her physician orders included a Hospice consult on 5/9/23. A significant change MDS assessment dated [DATE] was completed for resident #74. However, review of this MDS revealed the section on Health Conditions did not indicate the resident had a life expectancy of less than 6 months. Also, the MDS section on Special Treatments, Procedures and Programs did not indicate Resident #74 was receiving Hospice…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-09-28 · 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 observations, staff interviews, and record review, the facility failed to implement a comprehensive fall prevention care plan for a resident (Resident #67) with a history of falling. This occurred for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for falls. The findings included: Resident #67 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included hemiplegia, cerebral infarction, and convulsions. A review of the annual comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 6/27/2023, revealed Resident #67 had severe cognitive impairment, required extensive assistance of one staff member for bed mobility, and total assistance of two staff members for transferring. She had no documented falls since the prior assessment. A review of the comprehensive care plan, dated 6/27/2023, identified a focus area that read; Resident #67 was at risk for falls related to multiple factors including her cerebral vascular accident, hemiplegia, increased weakness, decreased endurance, decreased safety awareness, lack 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 Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-09-28 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolated
    Ensure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
    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, interviews with staff and the consultant pharmacist, and record reviews, the facility failed to have a medication error rate of less than 5% as evidenced by 2 medication errors out of 26 opportunities, resulting in a medication error rate of 7.6% for 2 of 5 residents (Resident #72 and Resident #61) observed during the medication administration observation. The findings included: 1. Resident #72 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His cumulative diagnoses included diabetes. On 9/27/23 at 11:30 AM, Nurse #1 was observed as she checked Resident #72's blood glucose (sugar) with the result noted to be 337 milligram (mg) / deciliter (dl). The nurse was then observed as she returned to the medication cart and prepared to administer Novolog insulin in accordance with his sliding scale insulin orders (where the dose of insulin administered would be dependent on the resident's current blood glucose level). Based on Resident #72's blood glucose result, Nurse #1 reported she needed to administer 9…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-09-28 · 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 observations, record review, and staff interview the facility's Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) committee failed to maintain implemented procedures and monitor the interventions that the committee put into place following the recertification survey completed on 7/14/22. This was for 1 deficiency that was cited in the area of Free of Medication Error Rate of 5 Percent or More (F759). The continued failure of the facility during two federal surveys showed a pattern of the facility's inability to sustain an effective Quality Assessment and Assurance Program (QA). The findings included: This citation is cross referred to: F759: During the facility's recertification survey on 9/28/23, the facility failed to have a medication error rate of less than 5% as evidenced by 2 medication errors out of 26 opportunities, resulting in a medication error rate of 7.6% for 2 of 5 residents (Resident #72 and Resident #61) observed during the medication administration observation. During the facility's recertification survey of 7/14/22, the facility's medication error rate was greater…

    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 · D2023-09-28 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    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, staff interviews, and record review, the facility staff failed to clean and disinfect a blood glucose meter (glucometer) dedicated for individual-resident use in a manner that would protect against the cross-contamination from contact with other meters or equipment. This was observed for 2 out of 8 sample residents (Residents #64 and #17) who were observed to have a blood glucose (sugar) check. The findings included: A review of the facility policy entitled Glucometer Disinfection (Date Implemented: January 2018; Date Reviewed / Revised: December 2019) included the following Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines related to the disinfection of glucometers, in part: Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines: 1. The facility will ensure blood glucometers will be cleaned, disinfected, and air-dried after each use and according to manufacturer's instructions for multi-resident use 2. The glucometers should be disinfected with a wipe pre-saturated with an EPA [Environmental Protection Agency] registered healthcare disinfectant that is effective against…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

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.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to CENTURY CARE MANAGEMENT — 7 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 4 of 54.1≈ chain avg
Health inspection 4 of 54.3-0.3 vs chain
Staffing 3 of 52.9+0.1 vs chain
Quality measures 2 of 53.4-1.4 vs chain
The other 6 homes this chain runs (chain average 4.1★, 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 / managerTypeRoleShareSince
NOAH K DUNCAN MRTL TROrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 04/30/2013
WILSON, HORACEIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 08/23/2017
BOYETTE, BARBARAIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 03/08/2007
GILLIAM, ROBERTIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 09/01/2021
SCHMIDLIN, JAMESIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 09/01/2021
CENTURY CARE MANAGEMENT, INC.OrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 03/08/2007

CMS files one row per role, so the 7 rows in the source record cover these 6 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

2 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.

$11.8M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-4.8%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.7M
Related-party expense14% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 63%Medicare 6%Other / private 31%

This home reported $1.7M 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.

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

$350per resident / day
operating cost
$10,635per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$334per 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 345391. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-30, 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