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

PruittHealth-Trent

836 Hospital Drive, New Bern, NC 28560 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 116 certified beds · (252) 638-6001 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
2 immediate-jeopardy citations$16,152 in federal fines
Insights

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

In its favor
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (18% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • inspectors cited 2 immediate-jeopardy problems — the most serious level
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (16) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • the CMS record shows $16,152 in federal fines (most recent 2026-02-06)
  • its payroll-based staffing score sits well above its independent inspection score
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
  • its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
  • about 18% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies

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

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

1/5
CMS overall
1 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 1 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 3 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 2 of 5

Worth a closer look. This home's staffing rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the staffing score rests on the facility's own payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★ 4/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
2000 Neuse Blvd · (252) 633-8024 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
2001 Neuse Blvd · (252) 672-8365 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
1415 Tatum Dr · (252) 638-8474 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
700 Professional Dr · (252) 514-9855

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 4 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 1 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 increased14.8%15.6%15.4%typical
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight8.7%7.2%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.4%0.7%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection8.6%2.3%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms1.7%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 injury2.9%3.5%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened21.6%18.3%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication16.6%21.3%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%94.1%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers6.1%5.5%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control10.9%20.7%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table11.5%14.0%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication2.1%1.4%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine93.3%78.1%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission25.4%22.9%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit12.8%12.9%12.0%typical
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days0.741.781.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.621.801.80better

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.

48.6% 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 55 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

48.6%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
12.0%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
26.9%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.16U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.08hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.06hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.02hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 26.9% 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 26 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 0.16 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 14% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 4% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

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 SNF48.6%CMS range 37.0–65.151.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF12.0%CMS range 8.6–18.810.7%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 discharge26.9%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 discharge46.1%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 discharge30.8%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 dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 worsened3.5%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 hospitalization6.6%CMS range 3.7–12.47.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.811.02Oct 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

0.53
RN hours/ resident / day
0.81
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.04
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.38
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.29
RN hoursweekends
17.6%
Total nursing turnover
30.8%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 116 beds and averages 100.3 residents a day — about 86% occupied, or roughly 16 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 3.38 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.53 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.04 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.82 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.60 on weekdays — 22% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.63 to 0.29 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 18% is below 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

1
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-05-14)
5
at the previous standard inspection (2025-02-27)

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

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.

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

  • Immediate jeopardy · J2026-02-06 · 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, Nurse Practitioner, and Physician for Resident # 1, who had a critical blood glucose level the week prior to 1/21/26 without a documented long term plan to address the resident's diabetes after that date, the facility failed to notify the physician regarding all changes in condition observed on 1/21/26 and consult with the physician to determine if an alternate plan of treatment needed to commence to address all the resident's symptoms so that nursing staff would receive physician orders for monitoring the resident's change in condition, monitoring blood glucose, monitoring oxygen saturations, monitoring vital signs and other orders to treat her condition. Interviews with Nurse Practitioner # 2 and Nurse # 2 revealed the provider was notified regarding Resident # 1 having a cough on the morning of 1/21/26, a chest x-ray was requested, and an order was given for the chest x-ray. This was the only communication that day with the medical provider. On 1/21/26 when…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Immediate jeopardy · J2026-02-06 · 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 interviews with staff, Nurse Practitioner, Physician, and Consultant Pharmacist, for Resident # 1, the facility failed to 1) ensure comprehensive assessment, monitoring, and treatment of the resident's diabetes and 2) ensure acute monitoring, assessment, and treatment when the resident further developed respiratory symptoms in conjunction with untreated diabetes. On 10/14/25 Resident # 1 had a Hemoglobin A1C collected which showed a result of 8.1 % with a normal range noted on the lab report to be less than or equal to 5.7. (A Hemoglobin A1C measures average blood sugar levels over the past 2-3 months). There was no documented plan to address the resident's elevated Hemoglobin A1C. On 1/14/26 facility staff were made aware of a critically high serum blood glucose level of 466 which had been drawn on 1/13/26. (For adults with diabetes, normal blood sugar targets range from 80 to 130). Upon notification to staff by the lab, a finger stick blood sugar was done on 1/14/26 and revealed a…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-05-14 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide restorative services as outlined in the plan of care for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for rehabilitation and restorative services (Resident #47).Findings included:Resident #47 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with active diagnoses that included lumbar spinal stenosis with neurogenic claudication (intermittent leg pain from impingement of the nerves emanating from the spinal cord), hypertension, and diabetes mellitus.Resident #47's Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] revealed he was assessed as cognitively intact. He had no functional impairment of range of motion to his upper and lower extremities and no contractures.Review of a restorative communication sheet from therapy dated 4/28/26 indicated Resident #47 required Active Range of Motion and Active Assisted Range of Motion to both lower extremities six days per week. The documented goal was to reduce the likelihood of functional loss and prevent skin integrity…

    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 · D2026-02-06 · tag F0711 — isolated
    Ensure the resident's doctor reviews the resident's care, writes, signs and dates progress notes and orders, at each required visit.
    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 interview with staff and Nurse Practitioner, the facility failed to ensure that the medical provider documented a plan to address Resident # 1's diabetes during a required regulatory visit. This was for 1 of 3 residents whose medical records were reviewed related to medical needs (Resident #1).The findings included:Record review revealed Resident # 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of diabetes.Record review revealed Nurse Practitioner (NP) # 1 documented she was seeing the resident for a regulatory visit on 9/26/25, and Resident # 1's diabetes was diet controlled.Review of labs revealed Resident # 1 had a HgbA1C (Hemoglobin A1C), which was ordered on 10/14/25, by Nurse Practitioner # 1. The lab report included that the lab was drawn on 10/14/25 at 7:18 AM and the results on 10/15/25 showed a result of 8.1 % with a normal range noted on the lab report to be less than or equal to 5.7. (A Hemoglobin A1C measures average blood sugar levels over the past 2-3 months…

    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.

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-06 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolated
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure food was sealed when stored, the floor was clean, and food storage shelves were free of grainy food particles for 1 of 1 main facility kitchen. The findings included:During kitchen observations made on 1/30/26 beginning at 7:50 AM the following were observed. In the dry storage room there was a container of multiple large bags of cereal. The top bag was open. The lid to the container was found on the floor underneath another shelving unit in the dry storage room. Grits were on a shelf and not sealed up and closed, rather the top of the grits bag was rolled up. The metal shelf, where the grits were located, had a liner. The liner on this shelf and another kitchen shelf in the dry storage room had very fine grainy particles visible on the liner. Underneath the shelving units in the dry storage room were multiple items and food crumbs which included but were not limited to loose, dry cereal, a dried up orange peeling, two closed packets of cookies, two water bottles, two condiment packets, a carbonated drink, a…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-02-06 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — isolated
    Make sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, and interviews with staff, contracted pest control technicians, and a local health department employee, the facility failed to ensure 1) cleaning practices and food storage practices were carried out in the main kitchen to deter attraction of pests and 2) communicate effectively with pest control technicians to ensure contributing factors to pests could be identified and efforts made to resolve any issues for 1 of 1 main kitchen area in the facility.The findings included:Review of pest control records provided by the facility's corporate office and Health Department records revealed the following information:On 5/19/25 Contracted Pest Control Technician # 1 noted the following in an invoice. A few roaches were found in the kitchen area. The area was inspected and serviced. There were sanitation issues identified in the kitchen which could lead to pest problems. The floor under the cook/steam line was in need of cleaning and there was food or grease build-up observed in the kitchen. The inspection report invoice noted, Please clean regularly.On 7/30/25 Pest…

    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 · E2025-02-27 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — pattern
    Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff and Responsible Party (RP) interviews, the facility failed to ensure a copy of the resident's advanced directive was included in the resident's record and failed to honor the resident's wishes with regards to code status as expressed by the resident's RP on admission. This was for 1 of 11 residents (Resident #94) reviewed for advanced directives. Findings included: A review of Resident #94's hospital Discharge summary dated [DATE] revealed his code status in the hospital was full code (a medical term that indicates a patient wants to receive all available measures to save their life in an emergency). It was initialed by Unit Manager #1 indicating she reviewed the document. Resident #94 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of dementia. A review of the facility's admission document titled NC Advanced Directive for Healthcare dated [DATE] and signed by Resident #94's RP and the facility's Admissions Director revealed documentation indicating Resident #94 had…

    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 · E2025-02-27 · 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, staff interviews, and record review the facility failed to attempt alternatives prior to installing side rails for 2 of 4 residents (Resident #18 and Resident #98) reviewed for side rails. Findings included: 1. Resident #18 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of diffuse traumatic brain injury. A review of Resident #18's record revealed an assessment titled restraint-adaptive equipment use dated 8/23/24 and completed by Unit Manager (UM) #1 indicated no answer was provided for the question have alternatives to restraint or adaptive equipment been tried in the past?. The choices were yes, no or not applicable. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #18 was moderately cognitively impaired. The MDS indicated Resident #18 required substantial to maximum assistance with bed mobility, transfers, and was non-ambulatory. The MDS revealed Resident #18 had no impairment of both upper and lower extremities. The MDS indicated Resident #18's siderails were…

    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 · D2025-02-27 · tag F0554 — isolated
    Allow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and resident, staff and Nurse Practitioner (NP) interviews, the facility failed to assess whether the self-administration of medication was clinically appropriate before leaving medication at the bedside. This was for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #87) reviewed for medication administration. Findings included: Resident #87 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD-a group of lung diseases that block airflow and make it difficult to breath). A review of Resident #87's medical record did not reveal a self-administration of medication assessment. A review of Resident #87's physician's orders did not reveal a physician's order to self-administer any medication. A physician's order dated 8/15/24 revealed Trelegy Ellipta (a long term medication to treat COPD) blister with device; 100-62.5-25 microgram (mcg) administer one puff inhalation once daily at 9:00 AM for COPD. A review of Resident #87's quarterly Minimum Data Set…

    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 · D2025-02-27 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to accurately code the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment in the area of falls for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for accidents (Resident #87). Findings included: Resident #87 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A review of a nursing progress note for Resident #87 dated 1/25/25 at 4:45 PM written by Nurse #2 revealed Resident #87 had a fall from her bed. Resident #87 had no skin tears, limited range of motion or dizziness after her fall. Resident #87 was complaining of mild pain to her right hip and right knee. A review of Resident #87's quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed she had no falls since her prior MDS assessment. On 2/26/25 at 12:46 PM an interview with Nurse #2 confirmed Resident #87 had a fall from her bed on 1/25/25. On 2/26/25 at 1:13 PM in an interview the MDS Coordinator stated she coded the falls section of Resident #87's MDS assessment dated [DATE]. She reported she normally looked at progress notes for information when…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-27 · 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 interview, the facility failed to follow their infection control practices and procedures for Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) during high contact care for a resident with a hemodialysis catheter when Nurse Aide (NA) #1 and NA #2 provided a bed bath without wearing gowns for 2 of 20 staff observed for infection control (NA #1 and NA #2). Findings included: The facility policy titled Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) dated 4/30/24 stated in part: EBP refers to an infection control intervention designed to reduce transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms that employs targeted gowns and gloves use during high contact resident care activities for residents with indwelling medical devices. The policy gave the example of bathing and dressing as a high contact activity. Observation of Resident #103's door on 2/26/25 at 9:03 AM revealed signage for EBP. The signage indicated that staff providing high contact care to Resident #103 were required to wear gowns and gloves. Further observation revealed a caddy outside Resident #103's room that…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-03-27 · 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 of pressure ulcer care, staff interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to perform hand hygiene after removing wound dressings, before cleaning the wound, applying the new treatments and when moving from one wound to another for 2 of 2 residents (Residents #1 and #3). Additionally, the facility failed to clean scissors before and after use for 1 of 2 residents (Residents #3) reviewed for pressure ulcer care. The findings included: The facility's policy titled, Guidelines for Cleansing and Observing a Wound, last reviewed on 07/28/2023, revealed as soon as you have finished removing the soiled dressing and cleansing the wound, remove and discard your gloves. Otherwise, everything you touch, including the faucet and handles, will be contaminated by microorganisms on your gloves. Your bandage scissors may transfer pathogens from one resident to th next, as well as to your own hands and pockets. To prevent this, wash your scissors with an alcohol product or soap and water before and after each use. Wash your hands (or use an alcohol cleanser) after removing…

    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 · Ecited before2024-01-11 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations and staff interviews the facility failed to label and date resident's personal food items stored in a nursing unit nourishment refrigerator. This was for 1 of 2 nursing unit nourishment refrigerators (First-Floor) observed. Findings included: On 1/10/24 at 11:24 AM an observation of the First-Floor nursing unit nourishment refrigerator with Nurse #2 revealed the following: a. two unlabeled and undated cardboard pizza boxes containing pizza. b. an unlabeled and undated brown paper bag containing tortilla chips and an unlabeled and undated cup of red liquid. c. an unlabeled and undated plastic food storage container of fried chicken, collard greens, and macaroni and cheese. d. an unlabeled and undated plastic food storage container containing corn bread and black-eyed peas. e. an unlabeled and undated plastic food storage container of green beans and black-eyed peas. In an interview at the time of the observation, Nurse #2 stated she was sure the unlabeled and undated food items in the refrigerator belonged to residents. She stated she had not placed the food…

    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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-01-11 · 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, staff interviews, and record review the facility failed to speak respectfully to a resident during an interaction (Resident #22) and failed to have a privacy cover on a resident's catheter bag (Resident #37) and for 2 of 6 resident reviewed for dignity. Findings included: 1. Resident #22 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A review of Resident #22's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed he was cognitively intact. His hearing was adequate. He exhibited no hallucinations, psychosis, behaviors, or rejection of care during the assessment period. A review of Resident #22's comprehensive care plan revealed in part a problem area initiated on 1/26/23 of behavior symptoms related to verbal behaviors directed towards others that included Resident #22 calling staff names such as stupid and dumb. An intervention was to maintain a calm environment and approach to Resident #22. On 1/10/24 at 11:13 AM an interview with Resident #22 indicated Receptionist #1 was rude to…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-01-11 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on observations and staff interviews the facility failed to keep medications in a locked medication cart for 1 of 4 medication carts observed (Medication Cart #1). Findings included: During observation on 1/8/24 at 2:34 PM Medication Cart #1 was found by the surveyor to be unlocked and unattended outside the nursing station. Two nurse aides were inside the nurse's station and two cognitively impaired residents were observed near the unlocked medication cart. At 2:36 PM Nurse #1 returned to the unlocked medication cart. During an interview on 1/8/24 at 2:37 PM Nurse #1 stated medication carts were to be locked when unattended and she should have locked the medication cart prior to taking medications to a resident. During an interview on 1/9/24 at 8:42 AM the Director of Nursing stated medication carts were to be locked when unattended for resident safety.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-11-16 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
    Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
    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, staff and Nurse Practitioner, and Pharmacist interviews, the facility failed to obtain a pain medication from the pharmacy for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #1) reviewed for medications. Findings included: Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Diabetes Mellitus and dementia. Nurse Practitioner (NP) order dated 8/29/23 read Dilaudid (hydromorphone) (an opioid pain medication) 2 milligram (mg) tablet every 4 hours for terminal pain. The start date was 8/29/23. The order was discontinued 10/26/23 and the end date was 10/26/23. Review of the October 2023 Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed the Dilaudid 2 mg tablet was documented as not administered as follows: - 10/19/23 2:00 AM - Not Administered: Drug/Item Unavailable - 10/19/23 6:00 AM - Not Administered: Drug/Item Unavailable - 10/25/23 6:00 AM - Not Administered: Drug/Item Unavailable Further review of the October 2023 MAR revealed no order for Dilaudid liquid until October 26, 2023. 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.

    Pharmacy Service 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

$16,152 in federal fines across 2 penalties.

  • $8,076 — penalty dated 2026-02-06
  • $8,076 — penalty dated 2026-02-06

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 PRUITTHEALTH — 95 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 1 of 52.8-1.8 vs chain
Staffing 3 of 52.5+0.5 vs chain
Quality measures 2 of 53.6-1.6 vs chain
The other 94 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.9★, per CMS)
1 of 5Oaks - Athens Skilled Nursing, TheAthens, GA 1 of 5PruittHealth - Holly Hill, LLCValdosta, GA 1 of 5PruittHealth - LilburnLilburn, GA 1 of 5PruittHealth- AikenAiken, SC 1 of 5PruittHealth- ColumbiaColumbia, SC 1 of 5PruittHealth- Rock HillRock Hill, SC 1 of 5PruittHealth-Carolina PointDurham, NC 1 of 5PruittHealth-DurhamDurham, NC 1 of 5PruittHealth-Union PointeMonroe, NC 1 of 5Pruitthealth - AustellAustell, GA 1 of 5Pruitthealth - Lakehaven, LLCValdosta, GA 1 of 5Pruitthealth - MaconMacon, GA 1 of 5Pruitthealth - Magnolia ManorMoultrie, GA 1 of 5Pruitthealth - Old CapitolLouisville, GA 1 of 5Pruitthealth - PalmyraAlbany, GA 1 of 5Pruitthealth - SwainsboroSwainsboro, GA 1 of 5Pruitthealth - ToccoaToccoa, GA 1 of 5Pruitthealth - West AtlantaAtlanta, GA 2 of 5NC State Veterans Home-KinstonKinston, NC 2 of 5PruittHealth - AugustaAugusta, GA 2 of 5PruittHealth- BambergBamberg, SC 2 of 5PruittHealth- DillonDillon, SC 2 of 5PruittHealth- EstillEstill, SC 2 of 5PruittHealth- Moncks CornerMoncks Corner, SC 2 of 5PruittHealth- RidgewayRidgeway, SC 2 of 5PruittHealth-NeuseNew Bern, NC 2 of 5Pruitthealth - BrookhavenAtlanta, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth - CreeksideAugusta, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth - DecaturDecatur, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth - FairburnFairburn, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth - Fleming IslandFleming Island, FL 2 of 5Pruitthealth - ForsythForsyth, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth - GriffinGriffin, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth - Richmond, LLCAugusta, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth - RomeRome, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth - SavannahSavannah, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth - Valdosta, LLCValdosta, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth-North Tampa, LLCLutz, FL 2 of 5The Oaks-BrevardBrevard, NC 3 of 5Christian City Rehabilitation CenterUnion City, GA

Showing 40 of 94; 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 / managerTypeRoleSince
YATES, LISAIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 02/28/2019
PRUITT, NEILIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 09/25/2007
PRUITTHEALTH INCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 09/27/2007

CMS files one row per role, so the 5 rows in the source record cover these 3 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

1 organizational owner 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.

$12.5M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+9.8%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$2.0M
Related-party expense18% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 71%Medicare 3%Other / private 26%

About 71% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $2.0M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 18% 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 2024. 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

$287per resident / day
operating cost
$8,724per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$318per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2024). 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 345371. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-05-14, 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