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

Village Care of King

440 Ingram Road, King, NC 27021 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 96 certified beds · (336) 983-4900 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse/neglect citation on record (F0600) — cited Jul 20251 immediate-jeopardy citation2 immediate-jeopardy citations CMS recorded as corrected before the inspection ended (past non-compliance)$110,113 in federal fines
Insights

This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.

Worth asking about
  • it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Jul 2025
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
  • inspectors recorded 2 serious findings as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (15) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • the CMS record shows $110,113 in federal fines (most recent 2025-01-17)
  • its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
  • nursing-staff turnover (78%) runs well above the national median (45%)

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

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

1/5
CMS overall
1 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 2 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 1 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.

Location & what’s nearby

Urgent care / clinic
119 Ingram Dr · (336) 443-9190 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
Walgreens0.6 mi
650 S Main St · (336) 983-2186 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
Walmart0.4 mi
204 Ingram Dr · (336) 296-6041 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
625 Meadowbrook Dr · (336) 983-2206

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 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 4 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 3 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.

Overall rating1★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased15.6%15.6%15.4%typical
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight6.2%7.2%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.7%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection2.3%2.3%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms2.1%5.9%6.5%better
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.0%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury0.8%3.5%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened35.9%18.3%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication22.2%21.3%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine91.8%94.1%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers1.6%5.5%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control21.4%20.7%21.2%typical
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table4.1%14.0%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.6%1.4%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine76.6%78.1%79.4%typical
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission24.1%22.9%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit12.5%12.9%12.0%typical

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.

54.5% 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 123 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

54.5%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
11.2%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
49.0%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.47U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.21hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.20hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.06hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

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 49 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 0.47 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 78% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 11% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF54.5%CMS range 47.1–62.451.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF11.2%CMS range 8.2–15.510.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge49.0%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge30.6%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge61.2%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified90.4%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting91.3%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.5%CMS range 4.5–14.77.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.941.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

0.38
RN hours/ resident / day
1.14
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.06
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.58
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.23
RN hoursweekends
77.8%
Total nursing turnover
71.4%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 96 beds and averages 88.8 residents a day — about 92% 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 3.58 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.38 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.06 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 3.18 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.74 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.44 to 0.23 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 78% 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

3
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-01-08)
0
at the previous standard inspection (2024-10-10)

Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

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

ABCDEFGHIJKL

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

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

  • Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2025-07-11 · 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 Based on record review, and staff, family member, Resident, Physician Assistant, and Medical Director interviews, the facility failed to provide supervision for Resident #1 who had a diagnosis of dementia, an addiction to cigarettes, and required supervision/touching assistance for walking 10 feet. Resident #1 left the facility unnoticed and unattended, walking along the side of a 35 mile an hour two-lane road to obtain cigarettes at a nearby store. Resident #1 was located approximately 1/2 mile away from the facility standing in a grassy field near the side of the road. The walking route to where the resident was located included an upward sloping sidewalk, a downward sloping sidewalk with a pond to the left, and then a dirt path that ended at the edge of the grassy field. Resident #1 did not have a phone, money or means to pay for cigarettes and stated she had hoped someone at the store would be kind enough to give her a cigarette and a lighter. There was a high likelihood of a serious adverse outcome 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Immediate jeopardy · J2024-03-23 · tag F0660 — isolated
    Plan the resident's discharge to meet the resident's goals and needs.
    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, ombudsman, family, friend, staff, the Home Health Nurse, and Adult Protective Services Social Workers interviews the facility failed to develop and implement an effective discharge planning process for 1 of 3 residents, Resident #1, by not assessing the home environment which was described as not safe by the resident and family, discharging the resident to home where the resident did not have a functional phone to contact people or 911 in the event of an emergency and arranging for individuals who would be able to obtain the resident's prescription medications and assist with basic Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) such as transfer from the couch to a wheelchair, toileting, peri-care, meal preparation, and bathing. The facility failed to realize the risk the resident was being placed at by being discharged to home without on-site assistance despite adult protective services being involved with the resident, family members stating the resident would be unable to care for himself,…

    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
  • Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2024-01-19 · 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 observation, record review and interview of staff, physician, resident, the facility failed to protect Resident #1 from rolling out of bed during the provision of personal care. Resident #1 fell from her bed to the floor. Resident #1 was sent to the emergency room and was diagnosed with a distal femur fracture (fractures of the thighbone that occur just above the knee joint) of both legs. The fractures resulted in hospitalization, treatment with Heparin (blood thinner) to prevent blood clots in the lower legs and Fentanyl (a controlled substance used to treat severe pain) for pain. The resident had to wear knee braces to both legs for stability until healed which can cause skin breakdown and significantly limit her ability to move/transfer during care, dialysis, or simple shifting herself in the bed. This deficient practice affected one of two sampled residents (Resident #1). Findings included: Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of a history of falling, and muscle 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Actual harm · Gcited before2025-01-17 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, and resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide care in a safe manner for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for supervision to prevent accidents (Resident #1). On 10/22/24 Resident #1 was lifted manually by Nursing Assistant (NA) #1 from the shower chair to the bed, causing Resident #1 right leg to hit the shower chair, get caught in between the shower chair and the bed, causing severe pain and swelling. An x-ray completed on 10/24/24 confirmed Resident #1 sustained an acute distal tibia/fibula (the two long bones in the lower leg) fracture. Findings included: Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis that included right hand contracture, spondylolisthesis (a condition where a vertebra in the spine slips out of place and onto the bone below it), spinal stenosis (narrowing of the spinal canal that occurs over time), and hypertension. Resident #1's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed she was cognitively intact, with no behaviors 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2026-01-08 · tag F0865 — failed to run a quality-improvement (QAPI) program — widespread
    Have a plan that describes the process for conducting QAPI and QAA activities.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and Administrator interview, the facility failed to maintain and produce documented evidence of a comprehensive and ongoing Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement program that demonstrated systematic identification, reporting, investigation, analysis, and prevention of adverse events; and the development, implementation, and evaluation of corrective actions or performance improvement activities for calendar year 2025. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all 94 of 94 facility residents. Findings included: Review of the facility's 2025 Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement plan policy revealed outlined principles of making resident care decisions based on data, goal setting for performance, the measurement of progress towards said goals and the utilization of all collected quality improvement data to guide day-to-day operations within the facility.Review of the Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement committee meeting minutes from January 2025 through December 2025 revealed signatures of interdisciplinary staff members in…

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

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-01-08 · tag F0645 — isolated
    PASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
    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 submit a request for an evaluation for a Level II Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) for a resident with a serious mental health disorder for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for PASRR (Resident #96).Findings included:A PASRR Determination Notification letter dated 10/24/22 revealed Resident #96 had a Level I PASRR with no expiration date.Resident #96 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included major depression, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and anxiety.The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #96 had a serious mental illness and/or intellectual disability. He received antidepressant medication during the MDS assessment period. Pertinent diagnoses included major depression, insomnia, anxiety, and PTSD. A Psychiatric progress note dated 9/29/25 revealed Resident #96 was seen for evaluation of major depressive disorder, PTSD, and insomnia. He was taking duloxetine (an…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-01-08 · 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 record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to develop comprehensive care plans addressing behaviors and post-traumatic stress disorder (Resident #96) and hospice care (Resident #13) for 2 of 19 residents reviewed.The findings included: 1. Resident #96 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included major depression, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and anxiety.The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment (4/24/25) indicated Resident #96 was cognitively intact and was marked as having major depression, PTSD and anxiety. Resident #96 was not marked for any behaviors and received two antidepressants during the assessment period. The most recent quarterly MDS dated [DATE] did not include any behaviors. Review of Psychiatric note dated (9/29/25) confirmed diagnoses of major depressive disorder, PTSD, and insomnia; medications included duloxetine (antidepressant) daily for depression and trazodone (antidepressant) for depression and insomnia. It was noted Resident #96…

    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 · D2025-07-11 · 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 review and staff interviews, the facility failed to protect a severely cognitively impaired resident's right to be free from physical and verbal abuse. During care on 6/26/2025 Nursing Assistant (NA) #5 held the resident's arms down on the bed, told him to shut up, and put her gloved hand over Resident #4's mouth while assisting with incontinence care. This deficient practice occurred for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for abuse (Resident #4).The findings included: Resident #4 was admitted on [DATE] with the diagnosis of non-Alzheimer's dementia. The quarterly Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] revealed Resident #4 was severely cognitively impaired and was dependent on staff to turn in bed, with activities of daily living and incontinence care. Resident #4 did not refuse care and had no behavior towards staff. The most recent care plan, revised 3/7/2025, revealed Resident #4 had cognitive loss related to dementia. The goal was to provide positive experiences in his daily routine without overly demanding…

    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 · D2025-07-11 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
    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 and procedure in the area of reporting when Nursing Assistant (NA) #6 failed to immediately report she had observed NA #5 physically and verbally abuse Resident #4 when NA #5 held the resident's arms down on the bed, told him to shut up and put her gloved hand over Resident #4's mouth while providing incontinence care for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for abuse (Resident #4). The findings included: The facility policy for Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation, last reviewed on 7/11/2024, revealed the following statement: All allegations of abuse, neglect, involuntary seclusion, injuries of unknown source, and misappropriation of resident property must be reported immediately to the Administrator and Director of Nursing (DON). Review of the investigation report specified an allegation of abuse for Resident #4 that occurred on 6/26/2025 at about 11:00 PM. This allegation was reported by NA #6 to the facility Administrator on 6/27/25 at 3:40 PM. NA# 6 observed NA #5 put her hand over Resident #4…

    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 · D2025-01-17 · 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 resident, staff, and Medical Director interviews, the facility failed to notify the physician of a change in condition for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for notification of changes. On 10/22/24 Resident #1 was lifted manually by Nursing Assistant (NA) #1 from the shower chair to the bed, causing Resident #1's right leg to hit the shower chair, get caught in between the shower chair and the bed, causing severe pain and swelling. On 10/22/24 Nurse #1, was notified by NA #1 that Resident #1 complained of pain. Nurse #1 did not notify the physician. On 10/22/24, Nurse #2, was informed by Resident #1 of her right leg hurting, and did not notify the physician. On 10/23/24, Nurse #3, who worked from 11:00 pm (10/22/24) to 7:00 am (10/23/24), was notified by NA (Unknown) that resident complained of pain, and did not notify the physician. On 10/23/24, Nurse #4, who worked from 7:00 am to 11:00 pm, was notified by NA (Unknown) that resident complained of pain. Nurse #4 did not notify…

    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 · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · D2025-01-17 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, and resident, staff and Medical Director interviews, the facility failed to complete and document ongoing comprehensive assessments after Resident #1 reported leg pain which delayed medical treatment and interventions for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for assessments. On 10/22/24 Resident #1 was lifted manually by Nursing Assistant (NA) #1 from the shower chair to the bed, causing Resident #1 right leg to hit the shower chair, get caught in between the shower chair and the bed, causing pain and swelling. On 10/22/24, between 11:00 am and 11:30 am, Nurse #1 was notified by NA #1 that Resident #1 complained of pain and Nurse #1 did not complete an assessment. Nurse #2 was assigned to Resident #1 on 10/22/24 from 3:00 pm to 11:00 pm and did not complete a comprehensive assessment and only documented she did not observe any bruising or open area. Nurse #3 (assigned to Resident #1 on 10/22/24 at 11:00 pm to 7:00 am on 10/23/24) and Nurse #4 (assigned to Resident #1 10/24/24 from 7:00…

    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 · D2024-03-23 · tag F0579 — isolated
    Provide information about how to apply for and use Medicare and Medicaid benefits.
    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 resident and family member interviewa, staff interviews and record review the facility failed to provide a resident with information regarding application for Medicaid for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for discharge (Resident #1). Findings included: Resident #1 was admitted to the facility from the hospital on [DATE]. Resident #1's last date of skilled nursing services ended on 02/22/24 and he was discharged to his home on [DATE]. During an interview with Resident #1 on 03/18/24 at 10:45 AM he stated the Social Worker (SW) and the Business Office Manager (BOM) told him and his Family Member the facility did not do the Medicaid application. The SW told them they would have to apply for community Medicaid on their own. An interview was conducted with Resident #1's Family Member on 03/18/24 at 4:51 PM. He stated he tried to get the BOM to help file for Medicaid and she said Oh, we can't do that and the Social Worker said she could not help either. During an interview with the Social Worker on 03/19/24 at 10:20…

    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 · D2024-03-23 · tag F0623 — isolated
    Provide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff and family member interviews, the facility failed to provide the resident a notification of discharge and did not send a copy of the notice to the Ombudsman for 1 of 1 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for discharge. Findings included: Resident # 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A review of the medical record review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #1 was cognitively intact. A record review revealed Resident #1 was his own responsible person. An interview on 03/18/24 at 10:45 AM with Resident #1 revealed he was aware he was to be discharged on 02/27/24 but he did not receive a written notification of his discharge. An interview on 03/19/24 at 10:20 AM the facility Social Worker (SW) revealed the facility did not send a written notice of transfer/discharge with Resident #1 or send a copy of the written notices to the Ombudsman. She stated Resident #1 was an insurance-initiated discharge and she was not required to provide…

    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 · D2024-03-23 · tag F0661 — isolated
    Ensure necessary information is communicated to the resident, and receiving health care provider at the time of a planned discharge.
    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 interviews and record review, the facility failed to complete a discharge summary for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #1) reviewed for planned discharge to the community. Findings included: Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included, in part, infection following a procedure, hypertension, heart disease, muscle weakness, and peripheral vascular disease. A review of the comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #1 was cognitively intact and discharge planning was in place as Resident #1 expected to be discharged to the community. A review of the medical record revealed a discharge instruction sheet dated 02/26/24 was provided to the resident on the day of discharge. The discharge instruction sheet included information on home health services and a list of medications. A review of the medical record revealed no discharge summary was completed prior to or after Resident #1 discharged home. Resident #1's care plan dated 01/16/24…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-05-11 · tag F0582 — isolated
    Give residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
    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 interviews and medical record review, the facility failed to provide a CMS-10055 (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services) Skilled Nursing Facility Advanced Beneficiary Notice (SNF ABN) prior to discharge from Medicare part A services to one of three residents (Resident #77) reviewed for SNF Beneficiary Protection Notification Review. Findings included: Resident #77 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Medicare part A services began on the date of admission. The medical record revealed a CMS-10123 Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage letter (NOMNC) was signed by Resident #77 on 3/21/23. The notice indicated that Medicare coverage for skilled services was to end 3/23/23. Resident #77 remained in the facility when Medicare coverage ended for an additional four weeks, and discharged home on 4/24/23. The medical record further revealed a CMS-10055 SNF ABN was not provided to the resident or resident representative. A telephone interview was conducted with the Social Worker Director on 5/11/23 at 1:59…

    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

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

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

$110,113 in federal fines across 3 penalties.

  • $44,117 — penalty dated 2025-01-17
  • $49,544 — penalty dated 2024-03-23
  • $16,452 — penalty dated 2024-01-19

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 SABER HEALTHCARE GROUP — 126 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 1 of 52.9-1.9 vs chain
Health inspection 2 of 52.6-0.6 vs chain
Staffing 1 of 52.2-1.2 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 54.0≈ chain avg
The other 125 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.9★, per CMS)
1 of 5Autumn Care of MarshvilleMarshville, NC 1 of 5Autumn Care of Myrtle GroveWilmington, NC 1 of 5Autumn Care of WaynesvilleWaynesville, NC 1 of 5Brunswick Health & Rehab CenterAsh, NC 1 of 5Bryn Mawr Extended Care CenterBryn Mawr, PA 1 of 5Caring Heights Community Care & Rehab CtrCoraopolis, PA 1 of 5Colonial Health & Rehab Center, LLCVirginia Beach, VA 1 of 5Currituck Health & Rehab CenterBarco, NC 1 of 5Davidson Health & Rehab CenterLexington, NC 1 of 5Edison Manor Nursing & Rehabilitation CenterNew Castle, PA 1 of 5Gastonia Health & Rehab CenterGastonia, NC 1 of 5Greene Health & Rehab CenterGreensburg, PA 1 of 5Grey Stone Health And Rehabilitation CenterFort Wayne, IN 1 of 5Harmar Village Health & Rehab CenterCheswick, PA 1 of 5Highland Pointe Health & Rehab CenterHighland Heights, OH 1 of 5Hilltop Heights Health & Rehab CenterJohnstown, PA 1 of 5Maple Heights Health & Rehab Center, LLCEbensburg, PA 1 of 5Midtown Oaks Health & Rehab CenterAltoona, PA 1 of 5Mountain City Nursing & Rehabilitation CenterHazleton, PA 1 of 5Providence Health & Rehab CenterBeaver Falls, PA 1 of 5River's Bend Health & Rehab CenterHarrisburg, PA 1 of 5Riverside Health & Rehab CenterMcKeesport, PA 1 of 5South Boston Health & Rehab CenterSouth Boston, VA 1 of 5Tallmadge Health & Rehab CenterTallmadge, OH 1 of 5University Manor Health & RehaCleveland, OH 1 of 5Woodhaven Health & Rehab CenterMonroeville, PA 1 of 5Woodlands Health And Rehab CenterRavenna, OH 2 of 5Aurora Manor Special Care CentAurora, OH 2 of 5Autumn Care Of MadisonMadison, VA 2 of 5Autumn Care Of MechanicsvilleMechanicsville, VA 2 of 5Autumn Care Of SuffolkSuffolk, VA 2 of 5Autumn Care of CorneliusCornelius, NC 2 of 5Autumn Care of RaefordRaeford, NC 2 of 5Autumn Care of SaludaSaluda, NC 2 of 5Autumn Care of ShallotteShallotte, NC 2 of 5Azalea Health & Rehab CenterWilmington, NC 2 of 5Bath Manor Special Care CentreAkron, OH 2 of 5Berea Health & Rehab CenterFredericksburg, VA 2 of 5Broad Mountain Health And Rehabilitation CenterFrackville, PA 2 of 5Crawford Manor Healthcare CenterCleveland, OH

Showing 40 of 125; 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 / managerTypeRoleShareSince
WWBV HOLDINGS LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 09/30/2019
MUSICK, AMYIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 10/25/2021
VOLPE, BENJAMINIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 03/01/2019
WEISBERG, WILLIAMIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 03/01/2019
NICOLUZAKIS, GREGORYIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 03/01/2019
SABER GOVERNANCE LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 09/01/2019

CMS files one row per role, so the 8 rows in the source record cover these 6 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

$12.2M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+7.1%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.4M
Related-party expense13% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 45%Medicare 5%Other / private 50%

This home reported $1.4M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 13% 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

$311per resident / day
operating cost
$9,467per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$335per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in NC

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the North Carolina Medicaid page.

Typical monthly cost in North Carolina
$9,733/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$10,798/mo
Nursing home (private)
$6,496/mo
Assisted living

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 345381. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-08, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next