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

White Oak Manor-Kings Mountain

716 Sipes Street, Kings Mountain, NC 28086 · For profit - Corporation · 154 certified beds · (704) 739-8132 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Flagged for abuse1 immediate-jeopardy citation$53,811 in federal fines
Insights

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

Worth asking about
  • CMS has flagged it for abuse
  • it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Aug 2025
  • it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609, F0610) — 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
  • the CMS record shows $53,811 in federal fines (most recent 2025-08-12)
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
  • its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)

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

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

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

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★ 3/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
706 W King St · (704) 730-1237 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
709 W Mountain St · (704) 739-7225 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
1017 Shelby Rd · (704) 259-5213 · Call to confirm hours
Park
220 S Railroad Ave · (704) 730-2101 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 2 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 2 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 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 4 to 2 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 rating2★
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 increased27.3%15.6%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight6.5%7.2%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.1%0.7%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection1.5%2.3%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.2%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 injury6.0%3.5%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened20.6%18.3%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication26.7%21.3%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine99.3%94.1%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers5.0%5.5%4.7%typical
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control15.3%20.7%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table17.2%14.0%17.1%typical
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.9%1.4%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine84.7%78.1%79.4%typical
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission14.4%22.9%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit7.5%12.9%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.261.781.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days2.061.801.80worse

On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.

§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.

CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

44.4% 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 64 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

44.4%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
9.4%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
38.2%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.26U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.11hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.11hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.03hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 38.2% 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 34 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 0.26 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 37% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 5% 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.

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 SNF44.4%CMS range 33.5–56.251.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF9.4%CMS range 6.3–13.710.7%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 discharge38.2%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 discharge29.4%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 discharge35.3%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 worsened6.8%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 hospitalization7.2%CMS range 3.9–12.37.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.031.02Oct 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

0.42
RN hours/ resident / day
0.78
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.83
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.03
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.11
RN hoursweekends
46.5%
Total nursing turnover
46.7%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 154 beds and averages 132.9 residents a day — about 86% occupied, or roughly 21 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 4.03 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.42 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.83 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.53 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.23 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.54 to 0.11 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 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

9
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-08-12)
3
at the previous standard inspection (2024-05-02)

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.

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

  • Immediate jeopardy · J2025-08-12 · 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, resident, staff, resident representative, and Nurse Practitioner (NP) interviews, the facility failed to protect the resident's right to be free from abuse for 4 of 30 residents reviewed for abuse (Resident #32, Resident #59, Resident #86, and Resident #125). On 05/09/25, Resident #32 was heard yelling for help when Resident #154 entered Resident #32's room and grabbed her by the neck and pinned her against the wall. Resident #32 was noted to be swatting at Resident #154 to free herself. Resident #154 sustained scratches to left ear. On 04/20/25, Resident #154 balled up his fist and hit Resident #86 in the mouth. Resident #86 sustained a cut to her upper lip with bleeding. On 04/17/25, Resident #32 was heard yelling for help when Resident #154 entered Resident #32's room and grabbed her arm and pulled it. When staff arrived, Resident #32 was noted to be swatting at Resident #154 in an attempt to free herself. Resident #154 sustained scratches to left eye and left lip. On 08/16/24,…

    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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-08-12 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — pattern
    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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record reviews and staff interviews, the facility failed to identify abuse and ensure staff implemented facility's abuse policy and procedures for reporting abuse. This occurred when the facility failed to report allegations of resident-to-resident abuse to the State Survey Agency within the specified time frames. The facility also failed to notify the county Adult Protective Services (APS) of allegations of abuse. This deficient practice affected 4 of 30 residents reviewed for abuse (Resident #32, Resident #59, Resident #86, and Resident #125).The findings included: A review of undated facility policy titled Protocol for Reporting Abuse revealed if a reasonable person suspected that abuse had occurred, staff would immediately notify the administrator or designee, person in charge, and officials including the State Survey Agency and APS no later than 2 hours after the allegation was made if the events of allegation involved abuse or resulted in serious bodily injury. 1. Resident #154 was initially…

    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
  • Potential for harm · E2025-08-12 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — pattern
    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 review and staff interviews, the facility failed to complete a thorough investigation after allegations of resident-to-resident abuse occurred. This deficient practice affected 4 of 30 residents reviewed for abuse (Resident #32, Resident #59, Resident #86, and Resident #125).Findings included: The undated facility abuse policy titled [NAME] Oak Management, Inc. Plan for the Prevention of Elder Abuse was reviewed. A section of policy titled Resident to Resident Abuse stated all forms of abuse, including resident-to-resident abuse, must be reported immediately to the Director of Nursing and the facility administrator. Section 6 titled Investigation stated all reports of resident abuse, neglect, and injuries of unknown source shall be promptly and thoroughly investigated by facility management. The administrator or designee shall investigate the allegation by completing the following: Review the completed documentation forms or any other pertinent documentation related to the allegation. Review the…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-08-12 · tag F0700 — pattern
    Try different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record reviews, and Nurse Practitioner and staff interviews, the facility failed to accurately assess 3 of 3 severely cognitively impaired residents for bilateral half side rails on their beds (Resident #2, Resident #64, and Resident #77). The findings included:1. Resident #2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included dementia with psychotic disturbance, gastrostomy tube, and atrial fibrillation.Review of Resident #2's consent for use of bed rails dated 08/07/22 revealed the facility received telephone consent from the resident's responsible party (RP) but the consent was not signed by the RP or the nurses receiving consent.Review of Resident #2's care plan dated 07/15/25 revealed a focus area for activities of daily living (ADL) deficits related to generalized weakness and cognitive loss secondary to dementia, congestive heart failure (CHF), atrial fibrillation, and stroke with hemiplegia (paralysis on one side of body). The goal was for the resident to be able…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-08-12 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record reviews, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to maintain a resident's dignity when incontinence care was not provided as needed for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for dignity (Resident #139).Findings included: Resident #139 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included cerebrovascular accident (stroke) and hypertension (high blood pressure). A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #139 was cognitively intact, received a diuretic (a drug that causes the kidneys to make more urine) daily, was always incontinent of bowel and bladder, and was dependent with incontinence care and toileting. An interview with Resident #139 was conducted on 08/05/25 at 11:32 AM. Resident #139 stated that a few weeks ago she had an incontinent episode early in the morning. She asked to be changed, and no one came back to change her. She reported that she laid in wet briefs all day until her daughter arrived sometime after lunch. Resident reported she couldn't…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-08-12 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolated
    Keep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
    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, staff, and family interviews, the facility failed to protect private health information for residents when they provided Resident #153's medical records and a list of resident names, room numbers, medical record numbers, and allergies to Resident #43's Representative at a medical appointment. This deficient practice affected 1 of 2 residents reviewed for privacy (Resident #153). The findings included: Resident #153 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and was discharged on 03/23/25. Resident #43 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A review of Resident 43's neurology consultation form dated 08/15/24 revealed that the provider documented sent wrong medical records on Resident #153, as well as allergies for every resident in the facility. A telephone interview was conducted with Resident #43's Representative on 08/07/25 at 8:41 AM. Resident #43's Representative reported he attended a medical appointment for Resident #43 on 08/15/24. The Representative stated that the facility…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-08-12 · tag F0627 — isolated
    Ensure the transfer/discharge meets the resident's needs/preferences and that the resident is prepared for a safe transfer/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 record review, and Hospital Case Manager, Resident's Representative, and staff interviews, the facility failed to allow a resident to return to the first available bed at the facility after being sent to the hospital for a medical and psychiatric (psych) evaluation. The resident remained in the hospital despite being medically cleared to return to the nursing home after 5 days. This deficient practice was evidenced for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for transfer and discharge (Resident #154).Findings included: Resident #154 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged to the hospital on 5/9/2025. Resident #154 was admitted with diagnoses that included spinal stenosis, muscle weakness, dementia with other behavioral disturbance, depression, generalized anxiety disorder, unspecified glaucoma and resided in the locked unit. Review of Resident #154's face sheet indicated a family member was Resident #154's emergency contact, Resident Representative (RR), and responsible party. A review of progress notes…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-08-12 · 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 reviews, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide incontinence care to a resident when needed and was alerted by a family member that Resident #139 had laid in a urine soaked brief, clothes, under pad and sheets for several hours. This deficient practice was for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for providing activities of daily living care (Resident #139). Findings included:Resident #139 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included cerebrovascular accident (stroke), hypertension (high blood pressure). A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #139 was cognitively intact, received a diuretic (a drug that causes the kidneys to make more urine) daily, was always incontinent of bowel and bladder, and was dependent with incontinence care and toileting. An interview with Resident #139 was conducted on 08/05/25 at 11:32 AM. Resident #139 stated that a few weeks ago she had an incontinent episode early in the morning. She asked to be changed,…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-08-12 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolated
    Ensure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, and resident, staff, pharmacy and Nurse Practitioner (NP) interviews, the facility failed to prevent a drug regimen free from unnecessary drugs for 1 of 17 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. Resident #142 was administered a tuberculosis skin test using tubersol. Record Review indicated to only perform a screening as Resident #142 had an allergy to tubersol. The findings included: 1. Resident #142 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis that included vascular dementia, hypertension, and unspecified respiratory tuberculosis. Record review of admission paperwork dated 03/04/21 revealed Resident #142 had listed an allergy to tubersol (an intradermal solution used to perform a Mantoux test which test for dormant or active tuberculosis (TB)). No origin of allergy or reaction was noted on paperwork. Review of physician order dated 08/01/21 revealed Resident #142 was to receive TB screening sheet annually on March 1. Review of Resident #142 March 2025 Medical…

    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 · D2024-05-02 · 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, observation, resident, and staff interviews, the facility failed to develop an individualized person-centered comprehensive care plan in the areas of urinary catheter use and opioid (pain medication) use (Resident #89). This deficient practice was for 1 of 5 residents whose comprehensive care plans were reviewed. Findings included: Resident #89 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including diabetes mellitus (DM), chronic pain, peripheral vascular disease, and obstructive uropathy. a. A review of Resident #89's physician orders revealed an order dated 11/29/2023 for the placement of a urinary catheter due to urinary retention. b. A review of Resident #89's medication orders revealed: 1. Tramadol (an opioid) 50 milligrams (mg) twice a day for pain; start date: 11/27/2023. 2. Tramadol 50 mg three times a day for pain; start date: 12/21/2023 3. Tramadol 100 mg every 8 hours for pain; start date: 04/29/2024 A review of Resident #89's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated…

    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 · D2024-05-02 · 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 observation, record review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to follow their Hand Hygiene policy and procedure when Nurse #1 failed to sanitize her hands after doffing gloves used to clean stool smears from a resident's rectum and before donning clean gloves to apply treatment to the resident's rectum and then failed to doff her gloves, sanitize her hands and don clean gloves before refastening the resident's brief for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #21) reviewed for incontinence care. The findings included: Review of the facility's Hand Hygiene Policy and Procedure with no date revealed the following statement: Hand hygiene continues to be the primary means of preventing the transmission of infection. The following is a list of some situations that require hand hygiene: Before and after assisting a resident with toileting; After contact with a resident's mucous membranes and body fluids or excretions; After removing gloves or aprons; An observation on 04/30/24 at 12:40 PM revealed Nurse #1 came into Resident #21's room to apply hemorrhoid cream to the resident. The…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-05-02 · tag F0914 — isolated
    Provide bedrooms that don't allow residents to see each other when privacy is 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, resident, and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide a privacy curtain for 1 of 14 rooms on the memory care unit reviewed for privacy (room [ROOM NUMBER]). The findings included: Resident #48 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #48 was severely cognitively impaired. An observation of room [ROOM NUMBER] was conducted on 04/29/24 at 10:00 AM and revealed a semi-private room with and the bed next to the door had no privacy curtain hanging. An observation and interview were conducted with Nurse #3 on 04/30/24 at 10:15 AM revealed room [ROOM NUMBER] did not have a privacy curtain hanging. Nurse #3 further revealed housekeeping was responsible for cleaning and changing out curtains in residents' rooms. Nurse #3 indicated she was unable to recall how long room [ROOM NUMBER] had gone without a privacy curtain. An observation and interview conducted with Nurse Aide (NA) #3 on 04/30/24 at 10:20 AM revealed the privacy…

    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.

    Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-01-12 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
    Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, and interviews with staff, responsible party and Nurse Practitioner the facility failed to notify the physician when a resident (Resident #142) experienced a second change in condition when the resident's wrist started to swell following an unwitnessed fall. This failure was for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for notification of changes (Resident #142). The findings included: Resident #142 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis which included fracture of the carpal bone in the left wrist. An initial nursing assessment dated [DATE] at 8:33 PM revealed Resident #142 was alert and oriented. A nursing progress note dated 10/15/22 at 3:40 PM written by Nurse #1 revealed Resident #142 was noted to be on the floor at 8:32 AM. Nurse #1 completed an assessment and contacted Nurse Practitioner #1 at 8:47 AM and obtained orders for a 2-view x-ray of right wrist STAT (urgent, right away). The note revealed due to the resident having pain the orders were put in right away. The note revealed…

    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
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

$53,811 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $53,811 — penalty dated 2025-08-12

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.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
Ownership Data Not Available

The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

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.

$15.3M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+11.4%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.7M
Related-party expense12% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 72%Medicare 3%Other / private 25%

About 72% 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 $1.7M 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

$274per resident / day
operating cost
$8,341per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$310per 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 345151. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-08-12, 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