The Greens at Viewmont

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.

59.4% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 46 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 35.0% 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 60 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 0.21 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 26% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 4% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 104 beds and averages 87.0 residents a day — about 84% occupied, or roughly 17 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.45 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.67 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.08 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 3.65 on weekdays — 19% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.79 to 0.36 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 46% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

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.

23 citations, most serious first. The 16 most serious are shown; the remaining 7 are one tap away and print in full.

• Immediate jeopardy · J2026-04-20 · 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, record reviews, and staff, Resident Representative, emergency responders, Nurse Practitioner (NP), Medical Director, hospital staff, Program of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly (PACE) staff interviews, the facility failed to supervise a moderately cognitively impaired resident (Resident #1) who obtained a cigarette lighter and ignited herself and her bedding on fire. On 4/09/26 at 4:39 PM the fire alarm at the facility sounded. Staff responded to Resident #1's room and noted smoke coming from under the closed door. When Nurse #1 opened the door, he found Resident #1 in flames on the top portion of her body. Nurse #1 and Nurse #2 grabbed bedding from the foot of the bed and began patting out the flames. Other staff responded to the room and began wetting washcloths and towels to fully extinguish the existing embers that were on Resident #1 and her bedding. Emergency Medical Services (EMS) arrived on scene and transported Resident #1 to a helicopter pad where she was flown to a trauma…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
• Immediate jeopardy · K2024-03-08 · tag F0606 — failed to not employ staff found guilty of abuse — pattern
  Not hire anyone with a finding of abuse, neglect, exploitation, or theft.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review, staff, and Health Care Personnel Investigator (HCPI) interviews the facility failed to terminate and allowed Nurse Aide (NA) #1 to continue to work after becoming aware that she had substantiated findings of misappropriation of resident property which occurred while NA #1 was employed in a nursing facility and had a substantiated finding of fraud against a resident which occurred while NA #1 was employed in a nursing facility on the North Carolina Nurse Aide Registry on 08/15/23. NA #1 was terminated on 12/21/23 following an investigation of misappropriation of Resident #27's property that allegedly occurred in the facility on 12/13/23. This deficient practice of allowing NA #1 to continue to work had the high likelihood to affect other residents. The findings included: Review of NA #1's employee file revealed she was hired by the facility on 03/09/23. The employee file had an Orientation Checklist that indicated a registry verification had been completed as well as her background check. The employee file contained no verification identification number…

  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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
• Immediate jeopardy · K2024-03-08 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — pattern
  Develop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
  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 implement their abuse policy by failing to separate employment of Nurse Aide (NA) #1 on 08/15/23 when the facility became aware that she had substantiated findings of misappropriation of resident property and fraud against a resident that occurred while the individual was employed in a nursing facility. NA #1 continued her employment with the facility until 12/21/23 when she was terminated following an allegation of misappropriation of resident property. This deficient practice affected 1 of 3 residents (Resident #27) reviewed for abuse, neglect, and misappropriation of resident property and had the high likelihood to affect other residents in the facility. The census at the time of the survey was 86 residents. The findings include: Review of a facility policy titled Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation, and Misappropriation Prevention Program dated 03/28/23 read in part, Conduct employee background checks and not knowingly employ or otherwise engage any individual who has: been found guilty of abuse, neglect, exploitation,…

  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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
• Immediate jeopardy · J2022-11-17 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
  Protect 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 reviews, family and staff interviews, the facility failed to protect a resident's right to be free from physical and/or emotional abuse for one of two residents sampled. The abuse occurred on [DATE] during the evening shift (3-11 PM). Nurse aide #4 (NA #4) reported she was standing in the hallway outside of a resident's room (Resident #336) when she observed NA #1 grab Resident #336's right arm while attempting to transfer her from her recliner chair to a bedside commode while Resident #336 was resistive to a bath. NA #1 did not allow Resident #336 the right to refuse care which resulted in a skin tear to Resident #336 right arm and according to interviews of a Family Member and Staff (NA #2, NA #3, and NA #4) caused Resident #336 to be fearful of NA #1 and not want her to care for her. The immediate jeopardy began on [DATE] when NA #4 witnessed NA #1 grab Resident #336's right arm to transfer her to the bedside commode which resulted in a skin tear to the right arm and Resident #336 being…

  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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Immediate jeopardy · J2022-11-17 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
  Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record reviews family and staff interviews, the facility failed to protect all residents in the facility when Nurse Aide #1 (NA #1) was allowed to continue to care for residents after an allegation of abuse was made against her and according to interviews of a Family Member and Staff (NA #2, NA #3, and NA #4) caused Resident #336 to be fearful of NA #1 and not want her to care for her. The facility also failed to investigate an allegation of abuse made by a cognitively intact resident and failed to report the allegation to the State Agency (SA), Adult Protective Services (APS) and local law enforcement for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for abuse (Resident #336). The immediate jeopardy began on [DATE] when NA #1 was allowed to continue to provide care to residents in the facility after an allegation of abuse was made against NA #1 which resulted in a skin tear and bruising to Resident #336's right arm and according to staff and family interviews left Resident #336 fearful of NA #1. The immediate jeopardy 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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Actual harm · G2024-03-08 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolated
  Protect 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 observations, record review, and resident, staff, Police Officer, and Health Care Personnel Investigator interviews the facility failed to protect the resident's right to be free from misappropriation of resident property when Nurse Aide (NA) #1 allegedly stole a wallet and $320.00 from Resident #27. Resident #27 stated he felt like he was taken advantage of, and it really bothered him that she (NA #1) would do something like that. Resident #27 become tearful as he stated that he did not want this to happen to anyone else. This deficient practice affected 1 of 3 residents reviewed abuse, neglect, and misappropriation of resident property. The findings included: Resident #27 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE]. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed that Resident #27 was cognitively intact, had no signs of delirium and no behaviors. An initial allegation report dated 12/14/23 read in part, Nurse Aide (NA) #1 had been accused of misappropriation of Resident #27's property. He stated…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-01 · 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 observations, record review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to accurately code a Minimum Data Set assessment when they failed to include a resident's diagnosis of neurogenic bladder for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for catheters. (Resident #74) The findings included: Resident #74 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included malignant neoplasm of prostate, aftercare following joint replacement surgery, and neuromuscular dysfunction of bladder. Review of Resident #74's quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #74 was coded as having a catheter. Additionally, under section I, Resident #74 was not coded as having neurogenic bladder. Review of Resident #74's physician orders revealed the following order in part dated 01/07/25: Insert urethral indwelling urinary catheter due to neurogenic bladder. An interview with MDS Nurse #1 on 05/01/25 at 10:53 AM revealed information for diagnoses included in a Minimum Data Set assessment is typically retrieved…

  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 · D2025-05-01 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
  Ensure 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 observations, record reviews, staff and resident interviews, the facility failed to ensure Resident #35 swallowed medication during medication administration for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for professional standards. The findings included: Resident #35 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included coronary artery disease, diabetes mellitus, peripheral vascular disease and Alzheimer's disease. Resident #35's quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] revealed the Resident was cognitively intact. Resident #35's medical record revealed physician orders for *clopidogrel bisulfate 75 milligrams (mg) by mouth in the morning for peripheral vascular disease dated 02/05/25, acetaminophen 325 mg 2 tablets by mouth twice a day for pain dated 02/26/25, famotidine 20 mg by mouth twice a day for reflux dated 11/13/24, gabapentin 300 mg by mouth twice a day for neuropathy dated 02/17/25 and dapagliflozin propanediol 10 mg by mouth once a day for diabetes mellitus dated 11/14/24. 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-01 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolated
  Ensure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record reviews, manufacturer's instructions, and staff and Pharmacy Consultant interviews, the facility failed to have a medication error rate of less than 5% as evidenced by 3 medication errors out of 26 opportunities, resulting in a medication error rate of 11.54% for 1 of 4 residents observed during the medication administration (Resident #17 and Resident #46). The findings included: 1. Resident #17 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included renal insufficiency, dyspnea, shortness of breath and vascular dementia. Resident #17's medical record revealed orders for *fluticasone-salmeterol (a corticosteroid) 100-50 MCG/ACT (microgram per actuation) one inhalation orally twice a day for shortness of breath. Rinse mouth after use dated 12/08/23 and *artificial tears 1% instill two drops in both eyes twice a day for dry eyes dated 04/03/24. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #17 was cognitively intact. On 04/29/25 at 8:59 AM an…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-01 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations, record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to follow their Handwashing/Hand Hygiene policy when the Wound Nurse performed a pressure ulcer treatment on Resident #51 and did not wash or sanitize her hands before donning new gloves. This practice occurred for 1 of 2 staff members (Wound Nurse) observed for infection control. The findings included: Review of the facility's policy entitled Handwashing/Hand Hygiene last revised in October 2015 read in part: Policy Statement: This facility considers hand hygiene the primary means to prevent the spread of infections. 7. Use alcohol-based hand rub containing at least 62% alcohol; or, alternatively, soap and water for the following situations: m. After removing gloves. 8. Hand hygiene is the final step after removing and disposing of personal protective equipment. Applying and Removing Gloves 1. Perform hand hygiene before applying non-sterile gloves. On 04/29/25 at 10:45 AM an observation was made of the Wound Nurse performing wound care to Resident #51's stage IV sacral pressure ulcer. The Wound Nurse washed…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-03-08 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — pattern
  Keep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations and staff interviews, the facility failed to safeguard protected health information (PHI) for 8 of 8 residents (Residents #7, #10, #11, #55, #72, #77, #85 and #91) observed for privacy and confidentiality, by leaving confidential PHI exposed on an unattended medication cart in an area accessible to the public. The finding included: During a continuous observation made on 03/06/24 at 9:06 AM through 9:08 AM Nurse #1 walked away from the 100 hall medication cart and left a report sheet uncovered which exposed the PHI of residents names and room numbers of Resident #7, #10, #11, #55, #77, #85 and #91. The PHI included information of code status, vital signs, medications, diets, diagnoses, continent status and safety precautions. During the observation three staff members and one visitor passed by the medication cart. An interview was conducted with Nurse #1 on 03/06/24 at 9:08 AM. The Nurse acknowledged she left the report sheet exposed and explained that she normally laid a sheet of paper over the report sheet before she left the medication cart but forgot to do…

  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 · D2024-03-08 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record reviews and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure the code status information was accurate throughout the medical record for 3 of 19 residents (Resident #44, Resident #72 and Resident #140) reviewed for advanced directives. The findings included: a. Resident #44 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of the code status notebook that was maintained at the nursing desk revealed Resident #44 had a yellow Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) form dated [DATE] and an advanced directive for a Full Code signed on [DATE]. A review of Resident #44's electronic health record (EHR) on [DATE] at 2:16 PM revealed an order for a DNR dated [DATE]. The quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #44's cognition was moderately impaired. b. Resident #72 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of the code status notebook that was maintained at the nursing desk. Resident #72 had a Do Not Resuscitate order for DNR dated [DATE] in the notebook. A review of Resident #72'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 before2024-03-08 · 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 observations, record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to accurately code the Minimum Data Set assessments in the areas of discharge and lower extremity impairment for 1 of 2 discharged residents and 1 of 1 resident reviewed for choices (Resident #89 and Resident #1). The findings included: 1. Resident #89 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident #89's discharge Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] revealed he was discharged from the facility with a return anticipated. Additional review of the discharge Minimum Data Set assessment revealed Resident #89 was coded as being discharged to his home or back into the community. Review of progress notes revealed a progress note dated 02/02/24 that read, in part: Resident and wife insisted that resident discharge from facility today due to copays . Unable to convince them to stay and continue rehabilitation. Home health set up . An interview with MDS Nurse #2 on 03/08/24 at 12:03 PM revealed she had coded the discharge…

  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 · D2024-03-08 · 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 reviews and staff interviews, the facility failed to implement a care plan intervention for a non slip mat on a resident's wheelchair used to prevent the resident from sliding for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #23) reviewed for accidents. The finding included: Resident #23 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Parkinson disease. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #23 was cognitively intact and the behavior of rejection of care was not exhibited. The MDS indicated that the Resident had functional limitations of range of motion of upper and lower extremities on both sides and the mode of mobility was a wheelchair. She was incontinent and required set up assistance for transfers. Resident #23 had one fall since the previous assessment on 09/04/23. A review of an Incident Report dated 01/24/24 revealed Resident #23 had an unwitnessed fall and was found lying on her back on the floor and stated she was trying to get…

  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 · D2024-03-08 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
  Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to keep a dependent resident's fingernails clean and trimmed for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for activities of daily living (Resident #51). The findings included: Resident #51 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included seizures, major depressive disorder, and adjustment disorder. Review of Resident #51's annual Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #51 was independent with eating and required extensive assistance with 2 or more persons, physical assistance with personal hygiene. Review of Resident #51's quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] revealed resident had moderately impaired cognition with no delirium, no behaviors, or rejection of care. Review of Resident #51's care plan, last updated on 02/20/24 revealed a care plan for [Resident #51 has an ADL (activities of daily living) self-care performance deficit related to impaired balance, incontinence, refusal of care…

  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 before2024-03-08 · 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 reviews and interviews the facility failed to post cautionary and safety signs that indicated the use of oxygen for 2 of 3 residents (Resident #6 and Resident #58) reviewed for respiratory care. The findings included: a. Resident #6 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The admission Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #6's cognition was severely impaired. Review of Resident #6's physician orders revealed an order dated 02/28/28 for continuous oxygen at 2 liters per minute via nasal cannula. A review of Resident #6's 02/2024 and 03/2024 Medication Administration Records (MAR) revealed the Resident received continuous oxygen at 2 liters per minute via nasal cannula since 02/28/24. On 03/04/24 at 11:50 AM an observation was made of Resident #6 lying in bed sleeping. The Resident was wearing an oxygen cannula with oxygen delivered at 2 liters per minute. There was no oxygen cautionary signage posted to indicate oxygen was in use. Subsequent observations made 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.

  Quality of Life and Care 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.

Fines & penalties

$34,597 in federal fines across 3 penalties.

• $17,796 — penalty dated 2026-04-20
• $8,400 — penalty dated 2024-03-08
• $8,401 — penalty dated 2024-03-08

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 CCH HEALTHCARE — 33 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 6 rows in the source record cover these 5 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

2 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

About 73% 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 $1.3M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 12% 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