Greenville Health and Rehabilitation Center

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

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.

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 0.52 therapist hours per resident per day in 2025Q4 — more than 84% of the 13,714 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 34% 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 14% — 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.

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 2.96 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.47 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.51 to 0.40 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 fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

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.

29 citations, most serious first. The 14 most serious are shown; the remaining 15 are one tap away and print in full.

• Immediate jeopardy · Jdisputed · IDR2026-07-24 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
  Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the 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 record review and interviews with staff, Physicians and Nurse Practitioners (NP), the facility failed to notify and consult with a medical provider for new onset and continued vomiting and when bolus tube feedings (liquid formula is administered through a feeding tube into the stomach in larger volumes over a short period) were held for a severely cognitively impaired resident with a diagnosis of traumatic brain injury (disruption in normal brain function caused by an external mechanical force) who received all fluid and caloric intake through tube feedings. Resident #145 had an acute vomiting episode on [DATE] (Friday) before 6:00 AM, and the 6:00 AM bolus feeding was held. The medical provider was not notified of the vomiting or that the bolus tube feeding was being held. The resident had a second vomiting episode on [DATE] before 10:00 PM, and the 10:00 PM bolus tube feeding was held. Nurse #2 contacted the on-call medical provider, and a kidney, ureters, and bladder (KUB) x-ray was ordered at 10:42…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Immediate jeopardy · Jdisputed · IDR2026-07-24 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolated
  Ensure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
  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 staff, Physicians and Nurse Practitioners (NP), the facility failed to identify the seriousness of new onset and continued vomiting, complete and document ongoing comprehensive nursing assessments of the residents condition or identify the urgent need for medical attention for a severely cognitively impaired resident with a diagnosis of traumatic brain injury who received all fluid and caloric intake through bolus tube feedings six times a day. Resident #145 had an acute vomiting episode on [DATE] and the 6:00 AM bolus feeding was held. Nursing staff provided three scheduled bolus tube feedings on [DATE] before the 10:00 PM bolus tube feeding was held due to vomiting. The on- call provider was contacted and notified Resident #145's abdominal area had hypoactive bowel sounds and was distended/bloated. The on-call provider ordered a kidney, ureters, and bladder (KUB) x-ray at 10:42 PM and Zofran (antiemetic). On [DATE] Resident #145 vomited before the bolus tube feeding…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2025-06-11 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Actual harm · Gcited before2024-05-31 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-07-24 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
  Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, observation, staff, Nurse Practitioner, Respiratory Therapist and Medical Director interviews, the facility failed to reconcile conflicting information regarding the resident's oxygen flow rate following readmission from the hospital, for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for respiratory services (Resident #32).Findings included:Resident #32 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE], following hospitalization from 7/2/2026 through 7/6/2026 for acute-on-chronic respiratory failure and pneumonia. Diagnoses included chronic respiratory failure, tracheostomy (trach) (an opening in the neck that leads directly into the windpipe) status, quadriplegia (paralysis or severe weakness in both arms and both legs), dysphagia (difficulty swallowing food or liquids), and recurrent pneumonia.A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #32 had severe cognitive impairment and was coded as receiving continuous oxygen therapy and tracheostomy care.A care plan dated 5/25/2026 read,…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-07-24 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
  Safeguard 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, observation, and staff interviews, the facility failed to maintain an accurate medical record for the administration of supplemental oxygen for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for respiratory services (Resident #32).Resident #32 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE].Review of a physician order dated 7/6/2026, showed an active order for humidified oxygen to tracheostomy: 3 liters (L) every shift for tracheostomy use.Review of Medication Administration Record (MAR) dated July 2026 showed a physician order entered 7/6/2026 for humidified oxygen to trach: 3 liters (L) every shift for tracheostomy use. The MAR documented the order was signed as administered by Nurse #6 for the dayshift on 7/15/2026. On 7/15/2026 at 2:05 pm, Nurse #6, assisted by the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON), was observed performing tracheostomy care on Resident #32. After completion of tracheostomy care, Nurse #6 noted that the oxygen concentrator was set at 10 liters. When asked why the oxygen concentrator was set at…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-06-11 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-11 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — isolated
  Honor 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-11 · tag F0641 — isolated
  Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to accurately code the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment in the 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-11 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-11 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-11 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
  Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-06-11 · tag F0700 — isolated
  Try 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-11 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
  Safeguard 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.

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

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

“Disputed” is CMS’s own flag, not our reading: the CMS deficiency file records whether the home has formally contested a citation, and we reproduce that. IDR is Informal Dispute Resolution, run by the state survey agency that wrote the citation; IIDR is Independent Informal Dispute Resolution, a separate process before an outside entity, available when CMS has proposed a civil money penalty. They are different processes and we mark them differently. Two things to hold at once. A disputed citation is still a citation — it was written by a surveyor, it stands on the record unless and until it is changed, and we neither hide it nor discount it. And we cannot tell you how the dispute came out: CMS publishes that a citation is under dispute, not the outcome, so a tag marked here may since have been upheld, reduced, or deleted, and an unmarked tag may have been disputed and resolved before this file was cut. Ask the home what it disputed and why — it is entitled to tell you, and the answer is often the most informative thing on this page.

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 →

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

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