Greenville Health and Rehabilitation Center
2578 West Fifth Street, Greenville, NC 27834 · For profit - Corporation · 120 certified beds · (252) 758-7100 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- it has abuse, neglect, or exploitation citations (F0600, F0602) — most recent May 2024
- inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
- inspectors recorded 1 serious finding 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 (41) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $64,002 in federal fines (most recent 2025-06-11)
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (66%) runs well above the national median (45%)
- about 23% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 2 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 2 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 3 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 fell from 2 to 1 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.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 24.2% | 15.6% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 0.7% | 7.2% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.7% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 2.3% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 7.0% | 5.9% | 6.5% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 4.3% | 3.5% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 20.3% | 18.3% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 10.1% | 21.3% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 97.2% | 94.1% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 7.0% | 5.5% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 26.3% | 20.7% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 7.0% | 14.0% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.9% | 1.4% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 86.2% | 78.1% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 25.8% | 22.9% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 9.4% | 12.9% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.87 | 1.78 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.16 | 1.80 | 1.80 | 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.
35.4% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that worse than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 126 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 49.0% 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 155 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 0.50 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 81% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 37% 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
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 35.4%CMS range 26.2–44.8 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | worse than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.4%CMS range 7.3–13.9 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no 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 discharge | 49.0% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 discharge | 48.4% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 45.2% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 identified | 99.3% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 discharge | 97.8% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.3% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 3.5% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 8.4%CMS range 6.2–12.7 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.17 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS 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
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 120 beds and averages 113.2 residents a day — about 94% occupied, or roughly 7 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.40 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.50 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.00 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 2.92 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.60 on weekdays — 19% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.56 to 0.34 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 66% is well above the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are unchanged from the previous inspection. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
41 citations, most serious first. The 13 most serious are shown; the remaining 28 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2025-06-11 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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 2. Resident #85 was re-admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of cerebral infarction (disrupted blood supply to the brain). A review of his admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed he was severely cognitively impaired. He had functional limitation in range of motion on both sides of his upper and lower extremities. He required substantial/maximal assistance to roll left and right in bed. Resident #85 was always incontinent of bladder. He had no falls since his re-entry to the facility. On 6/2/25 at 3:37 PM a review of an unsigned incident report provided by the Director of Nursing (DON) dated 10/9/24 at 7:12 PM revealed at 3:30 PM on 10/9/24 staff was assisting Resident #85 with incontinence care, Resident #85 rolled out of bed face down sustaining a small skin tear on his forehead. Resident #85's family member was at his bedside, and Emergency Medical Services (EMS) was called. On 6/5/25 at 3:45 PM a telephone interview with Nurse #5 indicated she responded to Nurse Aide…
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.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2024-05-31 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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 observations, staff, Podiatrist, and resident interviews and record review the facility failed to ensure a resident was free from injury while being loaded into the transportation van for 1 of 6 residents reviewed for accidents. Resident #72's right foot became caught between the van ramp and hydraulic lift platform and she sustained an avulsion to her right great toe (forcible tearing off of skin), the skin was unable to be sewn together, x-ray results showed the toe had a minimally displaced fracture (Resident #72). Findings included: Resident #72 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her active diagnoses included coronary artery disease, heart failure, end stage renal disease, and diabetes. Resident #72's minimum data set assessment dated [DATE] revealed she was assessed as cognitively intact. She was independent with sit to stand function and chair/bed to chair transfers. She was documented to receive dialysis. Review of a nursing note dated [DATE] noted as late entry for [DATE] revealed Resident…
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.
- Actual harm · G2023-03-13 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor 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 observations, staff and resident interviews and record review the facility failed to maintain a resident's dignity when incontinent care for a bowel movement was not provided when requested prior to the meal causing the resident to feel nasty while trying to eat (Resident #71), and when a staff member spoke in a loud stern harsh voice causing the residents to feel bad and upset (Residents #48 & #18) for 3 of 5 residents reviewed for dignity. The findings included; 1. Resident #71 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, hypertension, and chronic pancreatitis. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] documented Resident #71 had no behaviors, required extensive assistance with toileting, was frequently incontinent of urine, and always incontinent of bowel. The care plan with a review date of 3/6/23 revealed Resident #71 had urinary and bowel incontinence so was at risk for infection or skin condition. The interventions…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-06-11 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor 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
Based on observation and interviews with staff, the facility failed to secure a packaged terminal air conditioner (PTAC) unit to the wall on 1 of 5 resident halls reviewed for the environment (Resident #280's room). The findings included: An observation of Resident #280's room on 6/3/25 at 8:20 AM revealed a packaged terminal air conditioner (PTAC) unit which is a self-contained heat and air conditioning unit was not secured to the wall. An area of outdoor grass was visible through the approximately ½ inch gap. An interview and observation of the PTAC unit in Resident #280's room was conducted on 6/4/25 at 10:50 AM with the Maintenance Director, he revealed the unit was coming away from the wall due to a screw missing which created an approximately ½ inch gap between the unit and the wall which allowed for the grass outside to be visible. The Maintenance Director stated he was not aware of this needed repair as no one had reported it to him. An interview with the Administrator was conducted on 6/6/25 at 8:40 AM. At that time, she revealed the department managers were tasked 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-11 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — isolatedHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
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 file a grievance on behalf of a resident when the resident reported a grievance verbally to the Social Worker (SW) related to multiple items missing from her belongings after returning from a short hospital stay. The missing items were not located. This deficient practice affected 1 of 1 resident reviewed for grievances Resident #93). Findings included: A review of the facility policy titled Service Concerns/Grievances dated 3/1/25 indicated that nursing staff, Social Work and Discharge Planners or any other team member receiving questions or issues of concern regarding care and/or services are to immediately respond at the point of service in an effort to satisfactorily resolve issues of concern. The policy stated the patient had the right to voice/file grievances/complaints (orally, in writing or anonymously) without fear of discrimination or reprisal. Resident #39 was readmitted to facility on 10/15/24 with a diagnosis of non-Alzheimer's…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-11 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure 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 area of high risk drug class medications. This was for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications (Resident #30). Findings included: Resident #30 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A review of Resident #30's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed coding that Resident #30 received anticoagulant (blood thinning) medication during the look-back period of the assessment. A review of Resident #30's Medication Administration Record (MAR) for February 2025 did not reveal any documentation indicating a physician's order for anticoagulant medication or that anticoagulant medication was administered to Resident #30 in February 2025 since her admission to the facility. On 6/6/25 at 8:35 AM an interview with MDS Nurse #2 indicated she coded the high risk drug class medication section of Resident #30's MDS assessment dated [DATE]. She stated although…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-11 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for a resident in the areas of bed rails (Resident #94) and for the use of a Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) machine for one resident (Resident #63). This was for 2 of 24 residents reviewed for comprehensive care plans. Findings included: 1. Resident #94 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A review of Resident #94's comprehensive care plan dated 11/3/24 revealed she did not have a care plan that included the use of bilateral quarter length side rails. Resident #94's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed bed rails were not used as a restraint. An observation was conducted on 6/3/25 at 12:43 PM in Resident #94's room. The resident was lying in bed with bilateral quarter length side rails in the raised position. In an interview with Resident #94 on 6/3/25 at 12:43 PM, she stated she had always had the side rails on her bed. An interview with the admission Nurse was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-11 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide 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 observation, record review, and staff and Wound Care Nurse Practitioner (NP) interviews, the facility failed to obtain a provider order for and implement the recommended pressure relief measure of a heel protection boot for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for a non-pressure related heel wound (Resident #62). Findings included: Resident #62 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of diabetes mellitus. A review of a Wound Care NP progress note for Resident #62 dated 2/25/25 at 10:50 PM revealed Resident #2 had a new non-thermal blister to his left heel. A review of Resident #62's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #62 was moderately cognitively impaired and he had one open lesion on the foot. Resident #62 required moderate assistance with sit to lying position, lying to sitting on the side of the bed, and sit to stand position. Resident #62 was maximal assistance with putting and taking off footwear. Resident #62 was moderate assistance with lower body…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-11 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide 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 and Nurse Practitioner interviews, the facility failed to ensure infection control standards were followed when Nurse #8 did not remove soiled gloves, perform hand hygiene, and don sterile gloves during tracheostomy (a surgically created opening in the windpipe through the neck to provide an airway for breathing) care for a resident and also failed to change the tracheostomy ties per the Physician's order (Resident #33). In addition, the facility failed to obtain a Physician's order for the use of a Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) machine for one resident (Resident #63). This deficient practice affected 2 of 2 residents reviewed for respiratory care (Resident #33 and Resident #63). The findings included: 1. Resident #33 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included tracheostomy status. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #33 was severely cognitively impaired and was coded as receiving tracheostomy…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-06-11 · tag F0700 — isolatedTry different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review and staff interviews the facility failed to attempt alternative interventions, assess for entrapment risk, review the risks and benefits of the use of side rails, and/or obtain consent from the resident or resident representative prior to installing bilateral quarter length side rails (Resident #94 and Resident #172). In addition, the facility failed to attempt alternative interventions prior to installing bilateral quarter length side rails (Resident #63). This deficient practice affected 3 of 3 residents reviewed for side rails (Resident #94, Resident #172, and Resident #63). Findings included: 1. Resident #94 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia, arthritis and heart failure. Resident #94's Minimum Data Set (MDS) revealed she required partial to moderate assistant with bed mobility and that she had impairment to both lower extremities. The MDS indicated Resident #94 was moderately cognitively impaired. Resident #94's comprehensive…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-11 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
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 document the completion of wound treatments provided to a resident. This was for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #85) reviewed for pressure ulcers. Findings included: A review of Resident #85's physician's orders revealed an order dated 6/5/25 with an order start date of 6/5/25 at 7:00 AM indicated to cleanse Resident #85's posterior (further back position) scrotal (a muscular skin covered sack in front of the pelvis covering the testicles) skin tear with soap and water, pat dry, apply collagen particles (a protein that provides support and strength to skin) covered by a thin layer of zinc oxide paste (a medicated cream), and apply bordered gauze (an absorptive dressing) daily and as needed. An additional physician's order dated 6/5/25 with an order start date of 6/5/25 at 12:00 PM indicated to cleanse his right groin (the area where the thigh and abdomen meet) abrasion (a superficial injury to the skin) with wound cleanser, apply calcium alginate with silver (an antimicrobial dressing) and leave open to air three times…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-11 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, and staff and Nurse Practitioner(NP) interviews, the facility failed to ensure infection control standards were followed when Nurse #3 dropped a residents medication on the top of the medication cart, picked it up with her bare fingers, placed it in the medication cup and gave the medications to the resident. This was for 1 of 11 staff members reviewed for infection control practices (Nurse #3). Findings included: An observation was conducted on 6/4/25 at 8:35 AM during medication pass. Nurse #3 was preparing several medications for a resident when she popped a pill out of the back of the bubble pack and it missed the medication cup and landed on the top of the medication cart. Nurse #3 picked the pill up off the medication cart with her bare fingers and placed it in the medication cup. She stated Ooops, I probably shouldn't have done that. Oh well. Nurse #3 then gave the medications to the resident. She had last performed hand hygiene before starting to prepare the medications for this resident. She had touched 5 bottles of stock medications, 3…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-30 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — isolatedHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to maintain documentation of grievances and evidence of the result of all grievances for 7 of 7 months reviewed. Findings included: Review of the facility policy dated 1/23/2020 titled Grievances read in part: (4) The Administrator will maintain a file for tracking and referencing grievances received and responses provided for a period of 3 years. A review of the grievance logs from June 2024 to January 2025 revealed all logs from June 2024 to January 2025 were unavailable. In a telephone interview with previous Administrator #2 on 1/28/25 at 2:40 PM he stated when he left employment at the facility two weeks ago the grievance log binder was on the shelf behind the desk in the Administration office. In an interview with current Administrator #1 on 1/28/25 at 3:30 PM she stated she had been unable to locate the grievance log binder for the time period of June 2024 to January 2025. She stated she would continue to search for it. In a follow-up interview with Administrator #1 on 1/30/25 at 11:00 AM she stated she still…
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.
Show the remaining 28 citations
- Potential for harm · D2025-01-30 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, and staff interviews and Pharmacist interviews, the facility failed to provide care according to professional standards when Nurse #1 borrowed medication from Resident #6 to administer to Resident #5. The findings included: Resident #6 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included diabetes with neuropathy (nerve pain). Physician orders dated 10/19/24 for Resident #6 revealed an order for gabapentin (a medication used to treat nerve pain) 100 milligrams (mg) to be administered once a day. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #6 dated 10/22/24 revealed she was cognitively intact. Resident #6 was no longer at the facility and was not available for interview. Resident #5 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included pain of lower extremities. Physician orders dated 10/19/24 for Resident #5 revealed an order for gabapentin 100 mg to be administered 3 times a day for pain. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-11-13 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews with facility staff and the Nurse Practitioner (NP), the facility failed to ensure there was effective communication during shift to shift report between facility nursing staff to avoid a lapse between the time Resident #1's STAT (immediately) lab was obtained to when the results for a STAT complete blood count (CBC) were received resulting in failure to identify critically low laboratory results. This deficient practice occurred for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for quality of care. The findings included: A review completed of Resident #1's hospital lab results dated 10/30/24 revealed on 10/29/24 her hemoglobin was 8.4 (normal values 12.0-16.0) and her hematocrit was 27.7 (normal values 35.0-47.0). Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included heart disease, anemia, a viral infection of the liver causing inflammation and swelling of the liver, diabetes, parathyroid disease, history of a stroke, and hypertension A progress note…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-11-13 · tag F0770 — failed to provide lab services — isolatedProvide timely, quality laboratory services/tests to meet the needs of residents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interviews with facility staff, Nurse Practitioner (NP), and the facility's contracted laboratory company, the facility failed to ensure there was effective communication between facility staff and the lab company to avoid a lapse of multiple days between the time Resident #1's STAT (immediately) lab was obtained to when the results for a STAT complete blood count (CBC) were received resulting in failure to identify critically low laboratory results timely. This deficient practice occurred for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for laboratory services. The findings included: A progress note dated 11/1/24 at 2:43pm stated the facility's NP was in the facility and notified Resident #1 having episodes of vomiting. The NP gave an order to have a STAT CBC lab drawn and notify the provider as soon as the lab results were available for review. Lab results dated 11/1/24 revealed the lab phlebotomist (medical professional who draws blood) obtained the blood sample on Resident #1 at 6:10pm on 11/1/24. The laboratory received the blood sample at 7:15pm from the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-05-31 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interviews the facility failed to have a documented water management program for Legionella. The facility further failed to ensure hand hygiene was performed during medication administration for 1 of 2 nurses observed (Nurse #1). Findings included: 1. In an interview with the facility Assistant Maintenance Manager on 5/30/24 at 8:06 AM he stated the Director of Maintenance left the position a couple of months ago and he had been responsible for water management, including an assessment to identify where water borne pathogens could grow and spread. He further stated he had no knowledge of what the water management system entails, how they were to assess for or prevent Legionella or who should have been notified should there be a concern with Legionella in the building. An interview with the Administrator on 05/30/24 8:59 AM revealed he did not know what measures were in place to assess the growth or spread of Legionella in the facility water system. He was able to provide the water management system binder for review. A review of the water management…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-05-31 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, record review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to remove an open and expired medication from 1 of 2 medication storage rooms observed (Hall 300/400) and failed to ensure 1 of 5 medication carts (Hall 300) and 1 of 1 wound treatment carts were secured while unattended. The findings included: 1. An observation of the Hall 300/400 medication storage room was conducted on 5/30/24 at 10:24 am with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) and the following was observed. The ADON confirmed the findings before removal of the item. One open vial of tuberculin purified protein derivative solution (PPD solution/TB solution) with an open date of 4/25/24 noted on the box was observed in the medication refrigerator in the Hall 300/400 medication storage room. The manufacturer's recommendation for the tuberculin purified protein derivative noted on the package was once opened vial should be discarded after 30 days. An interview was conducted on 5/30/24 at 10:25 am with the ADON who reported she was not sure how long the open vial of the PPD solution was able to be…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-31 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor 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 records review, and staff interviews, the facility failed clarify code status in the residents' record for 1 (Resident #59) of 23 residents reviewed for Advance Directives. Findings included: Resident #59 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included heart failure, coronary artery disease, and diabetes. Resident #59's physical chart was observed to contain a Full Code (cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) would be performed if the resident stopped breathing and heart stopped beating) Agreement dated [DATE] signed by Resident #59's family member. The chart further contained a Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) document dated [DATE] with no expiration date, and a physician's order dated [DATE] that indicated Resident #59's code status was a full code. A review of Resident #59's electronic medical record (EMR) and an order dated [DATE] revealed Resident's #59's code status was a full code. A review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed that…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-31 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
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 and Nurse Practitioner interviews the facility failed to protect a cognitively intact resident from verbal abuse by another cognitively intact resident that escalated into physical abuse when Resident #216 called Resident #51 a fat b and Resident #51 proceeded to purposefully run into Resident #216 with her electric motorized wheelchair (WC) resulting in an abrasion and bruising to Resident #216's right leg. This was for 2 of 4 residents reviewed for abuse. Findings included: Resident #51 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of stroke (disrupted blood flow to the brain). A review of Resident #51's care plan revealed in part a focus area initiated on 9/26/23 and last reviewed on 11/13/23 of verbally abusive behavior. The goal was for Resident #51 to decrease her instances of verbally abusive behaviors by 50 percent through the next review. Interventions included not to argue with Resident #51, and to reinforce the unacceptability of verbal abuse. A review 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-31 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolatedProtect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff, nurse practitioner, and resident interviews and record review the facility failed to protect a resident's right to be free from misappropriation of a narcotic medication (oxycodone) for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for misappropriation of property. (Resident #84, Resident #72) Findings included: a. Resident #84's Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] revealed he was assessed as cognitively intact. He was assessed to have rare pain which rarely or never affected his sleep, therapy activities, and day to day activities. Review of Resident #84's orders revealed on 2/14/23 he was ordered oxycodone 10 milligrams (mg) tablet by mouth at bedtime daily. Review of Resident #84's Medication Administration Record (MAR) for July 2023 revealed on 7/10/23 he was documented to have been administered oxycodone 10 mg at 9 PM by Medication Aide #1. Review of Resident #84's controlled drug reconciliation form for July 2023, used to keep track of the doses of oxycodone for Resident #84, revealed on 7/10/23 at 8 PM…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-31 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure 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 medications and diagnoses. This was for 2 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medication (Resident #98 and Resident #262). Findings included: 1. Resident #98 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of stroke (disrupted blood flow to the brain). A review of Resident #98's quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed she received injections on 5 days of the look back period of the assessment and insulin orders and insulin injections on 4 days of the look back period of the assessment. A review of Resident #98's physician orders and Medication Administration Record (MAR) for March 2024 did not reveal any physician's orders for injections, insulin or insulin injections, or documentation injections or insulin injections were administered to Resident #98 in March 2024. On 5/30/24 at 10:14 PM an interview with MDS Nurse #2 indicated she completed the medication…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-31 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interviews the facility failed to develop the comprehensive care plan in the area of anticoagulant (blood thinning) medication for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #98) reviewed for unnecessary medications. Findings included: Resident #98 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of atrial fibrillation (an irregular heartbeat which can lead to blood clots). A review of Resident #98's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed she received anticoagulant medication. A review of Resident #98's physician's orders revealed a current active order for apixaban (an anticoagulant medication) 5 milligrams (mg) twice daily for atrial fibrillation with a start date of 12/6/23. A review of Resident #98's March 2024, April 2024, and May 2024 Medication Administration Records revealed documentation apixaban 5 mg was administered to her twice daily as prescribed by her physician. A review of Resident #98's current comprehensive care plan dated last reviewed on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-31 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
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, family and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents rights and invite residents/resident representatives to participate in care plan meetings 3 of 7 residents reviewed for care plan meetings (Residents #31, Resident #53 and Resident #362). The findings included: 1. Resident #362 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and diabetes type 2. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] indicated that Resident #2 was moderately cognitively impaired. Review of care plan dated 4/23/24 revealed that a care plan had been developed on 4/11/24 and reviewed and revised on 4/18/24, and 4/23/24. Interviews with Resident #362 on 05/29/24 at 8:46 am and on 5/30/24 at 1:48 PM revealed she had not been invited to a care plan meeting since she was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. She indicated that no one had talked to her about her care. She further stated she could not say whether or not a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-31 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure 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 observation, record review, staff interviews, and Pharmacist interview, the facility failed to maintain a medication error rate of less than 5%. Two (2) medication errors were observed out of 25 opportunities which resulted in a medication error rate of 8%. This occurred for 1 of 3 residents reviewed during a medication pass observation (Resident #7). The findings included: Resident #7 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included asthma. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) quarterly assessment revealed Resident #7 had severe cognitive impairment. a. An active physician order was in place for ultra-lubricating eye drops to instill 2 drops in each eye daily for dry eyes. During a medication administration observation on 5/30/24 at 8:30 am, Nurse #1 was observed administering ultra-lubricating eye drops to Resident #7. The bottle of ultra-lubricating eye drops had a blue label attached which read shake well before use. An interview was conducted on 5/30/24 at 8:44 am with Nurse #1 who…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2023-03-13 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — patternReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and resident and staff interviews the facility failed to accommodate a resident's need for bed size as evidenced by a bedframe and mattress that was approximately 4 inches shorter than the resident's height for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for accommodation of needs (Resident #48). Findings included: Resident #48 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include paraplegia and rheumatoid arthritis. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #48 was cognitively intact and 78 inches tall. An interview and observation were conducted with Resident #48 on 03/06/2023 at 11:25 P.M. Resident #48 was laying in bed on an air mattress. The head of the bed was raised at approximately a 90 degree angle, his feet were up against a pillow at the foot of the bed, and his head was approximately 4 inches above the top of the mattress at the head of the bed. Resident #48 stated that he was 6 feet 6 inches tall and that his bed was too short for…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-03-13 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — patternHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure the advanced directive information was accurate throughout the medical record for 3 of 7 residents (Resident #25, #31 and #395) reviewed for advanced directives. Findings included: 1). Resident #25 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included in part multiple sclerosis. Resident #25's electronic medical record indicated a [DATE] physician order for Full Code. Review of Resident #25's hard chart revealed a form titled No Code Agreement signed by Resident #25 on [DATE]. Resident #25's signature indicated that resident's wishes were that at the time of the absence of heartbeat or respirations, no extraordinary or heroic measures would be performed. Physician signed the No Code Agreement form on [DATE]. The No Code Agreement form indicated a physician's order for no extraordinary means was required. Resident #25's [DATE] admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment indicated resident had mild cognitive impairment and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-03-13 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — patternDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
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, resident and Resident Representative (RP) interviews the facility failed to ensure the resident and/or the RP was involved in the review and revision of the comprehensive care plan by the interdisciplinary team (IDT) for 3 of 3 residents reviewed for care planning. (Resident #38, Resident #52, and Resident #42) Findings included: 1. Resident #38 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of stroke. A review of her quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed she was severely cognitively impaired. A review of Resident #38's current comprehensive care plan revealed 15 active focus areas last updated on 1/31/23. A review of Resident #38's medical record did not reveal any evidence of a care plan meeting was held for this updating of her care plan on 1/31/23. On 3/8/23 at 11:00 AM a telephone interview with Resident #38's RP indicated he used to regularly receive invitations to participate in Resident #38's care plan meetings from the facility. He…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-03-13 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — patternProvide 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, physician and nurse practitioner interviews the facility failed to follow up on a physician's recommendation on the hospital discharge summary. This was for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for hospitalization (Resident #70). Findings included: Resident #70 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and re-admitted on [DATE] with a diagnosis of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA is a sleep related breathing disorder). A review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for Resident #70 dated 12/31/22 revealed she was cognitively intact. A review of the hospital discharge summary for Resident #70 dated 12/29/22 revealed a discharge diagnosis of OSA not on continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and a recommendation for nocturnal (nighttime) oxygen at 2 liters per minute until Resident #70 could have a sleep study and initiation of CPAP. A review of Resident #70's medical record did not reveal any physician's order for oxygen 2 liters per minute at night nor any…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-03-13 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and staff interviews, the facility failed to: accurately record an opened dated for a tube of eye ointment, a bottle of eye drops, and dispose of an expired inhaler on the 300 hall medication cart. The facility failed to accurately record an opened date for two bottles of eye drops, dispose of an expired inhaler and dispose of an opened Lantus insulin pen with no resident name or opened date on the 200 hall medication cart. This was for 2 of 3 medication carts observed for medication storage. The facility failed to dispose of an expired box of bisacodyl suppositories in 1of 2 medication storage rooms observed for medication storage. Findings included: 1). Observation on 3/08/23 at 10:47 AM of the 300 Hall medication cart with Nurse #3 in attendance revealed: Resident #10's tube of Systane nighttime eye ointment with no open date. Resident #62's bottle of olopatadine eye drop with no open date. Manufacturer information indicated discard 28 days after opening. Resident #72's Ipratropium bromide and albuterol sulfate inhaler with expiration date of 2/6/23.…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2023-03-13 · tag F0791 — failed to provide routine dental services — patternProvide or obtain dental services for each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews with residents, staff and physician the facility failed to obtain dental extractions based on the dental provider's recommendations and failed to provide or obtain from outside sources routine dental services for 2 of 3 residents (Resident #65 & # 26) reviewed for dental. The findings included: 1. Resident #65 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His diagnoses included stroke, congestive heart failure, and diabetes. Resident #65's payor source was listed as Medicaid. The notes from the in-house dental provider documented on 4/6/22 and 5/8/22 indicated Resident #65 was not seen because he was at his scheduled dialysis. On 7/19/22 the note documented he was not seen due to his current medical condition. A review of the grievances revealed a grievance from Resident #65 dated 8/22/22 which read wants to go to the dentist to get new teeth. The resolution to the grievance read; Per ADON [Assistant Director of Nursing] conversation resident is requesting to have his remaining teeth…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2023-03-13 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — patternSet up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, record review and resident, Resident Representative (RP) and staff interviews the facility's Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) Committee failed to maintain implemented procedures and monitor the interventions that the committee put into place following the 3/11/22 focused infection control and complaint investigation survey and the 6/25/21 recertification/complaint survey .This was for 1 deficiency in the area of F761 Medication Storage and Labeling that was cited on the 3/11/22 focused infection control and complaint investigation survey and again cited on the current recertification and complaint investigation survey of 3/9/23 and 7 deficiencies in the areas of F550 Resident Rights, F561 Self Determination, F641 Accuracy of Assessments, F656 Develop/Implement Comprehensive Care Plan, F657 Care Plan Timing and Revision, F688 Range of Motion and Mobility and F761 Medication Storage and Labeling cited on the 6/25/21 recertification and complaint investigation survey that were cited again on the current recertification survey of 3/9/23. The continued…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-03-13 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolatedHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
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 and staff interviews the facility failed to honor a resident choice to get out of bed for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #52) reviewed for choices. Findings included: Resident #52 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #52 was cognitively intact and required total assistance with two people for transfers. The MDS did not document Resident #52 refusing care. Resident #52's care plan dated 2-28-23 revealed the resident required assistance for mobility, transfers, dressing, grooming, toileting, and bathing related to hemiplegia. The care plan goal was for Resident #52 to be clean, dry, and dressed appropriately for the season. The interventions for the goal were in part for Resident #52 to be out of bed by 10:00am. Resident #52 was interviewed on 3-6-23 at 11:25am. The resident stated she was not able to get out of bed on the weekends because there were not enough staff. She explained on Sunday (3-5-23) she was informed…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-03-13 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and resident interviews the facility failed to code the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment accurately in the areas of the administration of an antidepressant and history of falls prior to admission for 1of 23 residents (Resident #31) reviewed for MDS assessments. Findings included: Resident #31 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnosis which included in part fall with head trauma and major depressive disorder. Review of Resident #31's physician orders revealed a 1/31/23 order for paroxetine (a medication used to treat depression) 20 milligrams (mg) daily. Review of Resident #31's February 2023 Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed resident received paroxetine 20 milligrams (mg) daily. Nursing progress note on 2/2/23 indicated Resident #31 had a fall from bed with a wound to the forehead and was sent to the emergency room. Progress note indicated Resident #31 returned to the facility from the emergency room later on 2/2/23 with no fracture. An orthopedic consult note on 2/6/23…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-03-13 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, observation, and resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive person centered care plan in the areas of psychotropic medications and falls for 1 of 7 residents (Residents #31) reviewed for comprehensive care plans. Findings included: Resident #31 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnosis which included, in part, fall resulting in head trauma and major depressive disorder. Review of Resident #31's physician orders revealed a 1/31/23 order for paroxetine (a medication used to treat depression) 20 milligrams (mg) daily. Review of Resident #31's February 2023 Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed resident received: paroxetine 20 milligrams (mg) daily. Nursing progress note on 2/2/23 indicated Resident #31 had a fall from bed with a wound to the forehead and was sent to the emergency room. Progress note indicated Resident #31 returned to the facility from the emergency room later 2/2/23. Resident #31's 2/7/23 admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-03-13 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
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 mobility aides were provided as ordered for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #47) reviewed for range of motion. Findings included: Resident #47 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with multiple diagnoses that included joint derangements of the right hand, joint derangements of the left elbow, joint derangements of the left hand and non-traumatic intracerebral hemorrhage. Physician order dated 1-8-23 revealed an order to apply elbow splint alternating from left to right for a maximum of 6 hours on each elbow as tolerated. Physician order dated 1-8-23 revealed an order to apply right- and left-hand splints for a maximum of 6 hours daily as tolerated. Physician order dated 1-12-23 revealed an order to apply protective boots to bilateral feet as tolerated. Remove boots for skin checks every shift. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #47 was severely cognitively impaired and required total assistance…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-03-13 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary 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, record review, and resident, staff, physician and nurse practitioner interviews the facility failed to follow physician's orders for a change in medication. This was for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medication (Resident #73). Findings included: Resident #73 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of anemia (a lack of healthy red blood cells). A review of her quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed she was severely cognitively impaired. A review of her ferritin test (a blood test that helps the physician understand how much iron the body stores) dated 12/1/22 revealed the result was 848.70 (the normal reference range is 30 to 400) nanograms (ng) per milliliter (ml). A physician's order for Resident #73 dated 2/20/23 indicated to discontinue the ferrous sulfate (an iron supplement) 325 milligrams (mg) daily and start ferrous sulfate 325 mg every other day. It further indicated to discontinue the multivitamin. The order was written 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-03-13 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
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 ensure the medical record contained dental consultation notes resulting in a delay with dental extractions needed to obtain dentures for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #65) reviewed for dental services. The findings included: Resident #65 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The Nurse Practitioner (NP) note dated 8/25/22 included the past history of previous physician/NP notes. This 8/25/22 note revealed the following information related to Resident #65's dental care needs: -The 3/10/22 routine physician visit indicated, in part, dental consult -The 5/11/22 routine physician visit indicated, in part, dental consult re: extractions (reordered from previously) A review of Resident #65's medical record did not reveal any information about Resident #65s' consultations with an out of the facility dental provider. On 3/8/23 at 2:35 PM the current Medical Records Clerk stated she was previously responsible for transportation and was aware of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · Bcited before2025-01-30 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — patternSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to have a complete and accurate Medication Administration Record (MAR) for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #11) reviewed for record accuracy. Findings included: Resident #11 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #11's Physician's orders included: - Administer enteral feed Jevity 1.5, 237 milliliters (mls) (1 carton) twice a day at 5:00 AM and 11:00 PM with an order date of 10/23/24. - Flush feeding tube every 6 hours at midnight, 6:00 AM, noon and 6:00 PM with 150 mls of free water with an order date of 10/23/24. Resident #11's December 2024 MAR revealed the enteral feed had not been documented as given or refused on: -12/10/24 at 5:00 AM by Nurse #2 -12/19/24 at 5:00 AM by Nurse #3 -12/24/24 at 5:00 AM by Nurse #4 -12/26/24 at 6:00 AM by Nurse #2 The December 2024 MAR further revealed the 150 mls of free water was not documented as given or refused on: -12/10/24 at 6:00 AM by Nurse #2 -12/12/24 at 6:00 AM by Nurse #4 -12/19/24 at 6:00 AM 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.
- No harm found · C2023-03-13 · tag F0732 — widespreadPost nurse staffing information every day.
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 post accurate nurse staffing information for Registered Nurses (RN) for 13 of 76 days reviewed for daily posted staffing. Findings included: Review of the daily posted staffing sheets from December 2022 through February 2023 revealed there was no RN included on the posting sheets for the following days: -December 2022: 12/19/22, 12/22/22, 12/23/22, 12/24/22, 12/26/22, 12/27/22, 12/31/22. -January 2023: 1/1/23, 1/7/23, 1/21/23, 1/22/23. -February 2023: 2/4/23, 2/15/23. The facility scheduler was interviewed on 3-6-23 at 3:57pm. The scheduler discussed there was always a RN present in the facility for at least 8 hours a day. The scheduler reviewed the schedules and the posting and stated the posting was correct, there had not been a RN scheduled for the above dates. The scheduler explained when she could not find a RN she would inform the Director of Nursing (DON). During an interview with the DON on 3-6-23 at 4:05pm, the DON stated the facility had not had any issues with RN coverage since she arrived at the facility…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · B2023-03-13 · tag F0640 — patternEncode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of 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 complete and/or transmit discharge Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments (Resident #85, Resident #86, and Resident #87) and an entry tracking MDS assessment (Resident #31) within the required timeframes for 4 of 23 residents reviewed for MDS assessments. Findings included: 1. Resident #85 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged from the facility on 11/17/22. Resident #85's discharge MDS with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 11/17/22 was signed as completed by the corporate MDS Nurse Consultant on 3/7/23. This discharge MDS was not encoded or transmitted within the required timeframe. Interview on 3/07/23 at 1:48 PM with the MDS Coordinator indicated she had been in the position for 6 years and was responsible for signing off on the completion and transmission of resident assessments. The MDS Coordinator stated she reviewed the validation reports after she transmitted assessments to check for any warnings related 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.
“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.
- 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.
Fines & penalties
$64,002 in federal fines across 2 penalties.
- $52,965 — penalty dated 2025-06-11
- $11,037 — penalty dated 2024-05-31
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 LIFEWORKS REHAB — 64 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 →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 1 of 5 | 2.1 | -1.1 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 1 of 5 | 2.0 | -1.0 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 1.6 | -0.6 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 2 of 5 | 3.9 | -1.9 vs chain |
The other 63 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.1★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 63; lowest-rated first.
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 / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GREENVILLE HOLDINGS I LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 06/01/2024 |
| BRIDGEWATER NC HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/01/2024 |
| CZ FAMILY TRUST | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 06/01/2024 |
| HL FAMILY TRUST | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 06/01/2024 |
| HSHC 2024 FAMILY TRUST | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 06/01/2024 |
| IB MIMI 2022 FAMILY GRANTOR TRUST | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/26/2026 |
| IB MIMI 2022 FAMILY TRUST | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/01/2024 |
| JK 2022 GRANTOR FAMILY TRUST | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 06/01/2024 |
| MILANO FAMILY HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/01/2024 |
| ML MILANO 2022 FAMILY GRANTOR TRUST | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/26/2026 |
| ML MILANO 2022 FAMILY TRUST | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/01/2024 |
| TJ FAMILY TRUST | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/26/2026 |
| TOL OPCO INVESTCO LLC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 06/01/2024 |
| UH CAROLINA SNF OPERATIONS HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 06/01/2024 |
| UNIVERSAL OPERATIONS HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 06/01/2024 |
| WILL FAMILY 2016 TRUST | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/29/2026 |
| HOPKINS, MARSHALL | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 06/01/2024 |
| SKAHILL, STEVEN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/15/2025 |
| WOOLARD, JACKIE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/01/2024 |
| BURTON, NOAH | Individual | TRUSTEE OF THE SNF | — | since 06/01/2024 |
| ELLENBOGEN, MOSS | Individual | TRUSTEE OF THE SNF | — | since 06/01/2024 |
| RUBIN, ELIEZER | Individual | TRUSTEE OF THE SNF | — | since 06/01/2024 |
| WEISS, HILLEL | Individual | TRUSTEE OF THE SNF | — | since 06/01/2024 |
| 2578 WEST FIFTH STREET LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/01/2024 |
| CYOP CYBER SECURITY LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/01/2024 |
| HEALTHCARE SERVICES GROUP INC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/01/2024 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 37 rows in the source record cover these 26 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
19 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 80% 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 $2.5M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 23% 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
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
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.
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 345181. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-06-11, 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.