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

The Lodge at Rocky Mount Health and Rehabilitation

3322 Village Road, Rocky Mount, NC 27804 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 100 certified beds · (252) 442-4156 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (252) 442-4156 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
2 immediate-jeopardy citations CMS recorded as corrected before the inspection ended (past non-compliance)$16,984 in federal fines
Insights

This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • inspectors recorded 2 serious findings as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (16) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • the CMS record shows $16,984 in federal fines (most recent 2025-06-26)
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
  • about 25% 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.

3/5
CMS overall
3 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 3 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 2 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★ 4/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
600 Nash Medical Arts Mall · (252) 451-3200 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
127 Gateway Blvd · (252) 937-2266 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
4101 Sunset Ave · (252) 443-5192 · Call to confirm hours
Park
551 S Halifax Rd · (252) 972-1151 · 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 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 4 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 4 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 3 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 increased13.0%15.6%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight1.6%7.2%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.2%0.7%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection5.9%2.3%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms87.9%5.9%6.5%check this — see note marked dagger below the table
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 injury1.9%3.5%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened19.8%18.3%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication23.4%21.3%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine89.2%94.1%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers4.9%5.5%4.7%typical
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control14.6%20.7%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table0.0%14.0%17.1%check this — see note marked star below the table
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%1.4%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine83.3%78.1%79.4%typical
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission25.7%22.9%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit9.9%12.9%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.211.781.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.241.801.80better

* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.

This value is several times the typical-state benchmark. It can be real, or it can be a coding artifact in what the facility submitted. Weigh it against the inspection record above.

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.

57.6% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 405 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

57.6%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
12.2%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
54.0%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.67U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.39hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.22hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.07hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 54.0% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 126 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 0.67 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 91% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 7% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF57.6%CMS range 52.4–61.751.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF12.2%CMS range 10.1–14.610.7%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 discharge54.0%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge57.1%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 discharge61.1%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 identified98.7%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 setting86.4%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge95.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.3%CMS range 5.1–10.77.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.251.02Oct 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

0.45
RN hours/ resident / day
1.02
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.77
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.24
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.14
RN hoursweekends
39.6%
Total nursing turnover
70.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 100 beds and averages 82.9 residents a day — about 83% occupied, or roughly 17 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.24 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.45 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.77 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 3.69 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.46 on weekdays — 17% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.58 to 0.14 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 40% 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

3
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-04-10)
5
at the previous standard inspection (2025-02-12)

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 · J2025-06-26 · 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, observation, and interviews with staff, resident, and the physician, the facility failed to have Resident #1 assessed for injury by a qualified professional prior to moving the resident following a fall in the transportation van. On 6/05/25 when Transportation Driver #1 made an abrupt stop to avoid a collision, Resident #1 slid out of her wheelchair and her left foot wedged under the driver's seat. Transportation Driver #1 stopped the van to check on the resident, she pulled the resident's left foot out from under the driver's seat, repositioned Resident #1 in her wheelchair, and then continued to the hospital for the resident's appointment. Upon arrival at the hospital, the resident had again slid out of the wheelchair, her back was against the legs of the wheelchair, and the rest of her body was on the floor of the van. The resident's ankle was visibly swollen and she was in pain. Hospital staff instructed Transportation Driver #1 to take the resident to the Emergency Department (ED).…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Immediate jeopardy · J2025-06-26 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, observation, and interviews with staff, resident, and the Physician, the facility failed to ensure a resident was safely secured in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions in the facility transportation van during a trip to a medical appointment at the hospital. On 6/05/25 when Transportation Driver #1 made an abrupt stop to avoid a collision Resident #1 slid out of her wheelchair and her left foot wedged under the driver's seat. Transportation Driver #1 stopped the van to check on the resident, she pulled the resident's left foot out from under the driver's seat, repositioned Resident #1 in her wheelchair, and then continued to the hospital for the resident's appointment. On arrival at the hospital, Resident #1 had again slid out of the wheelchair, her back was against the legs of the wheelchair, and the rest of her body was on the floor of the van. She was taken to the Emergency Department (ED) and identified with a nondisplaced trimalleolar fracture of the left ankle (involves…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · E2026-04-10 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
    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 — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to date opened medications and discard expired medications for 3 of 5 medication carts (North Hall 3 medication cart, North Hall 1 medication cart and South Hall medication cart) and in 1 of 2 medication rooms (South Hall Medication Storage Room), reviewed for medication storage.The findings included:a. An observation conducted of the North Hall 3 medication cart with Nurse #6 on 4/10/26 at 2:09 PM revealed:- one undated, opened and used bottle of Erythromycin Ophthalmic Ointment 0.5%. The manufacturer's instruction stated discard 28 days after opening.- one undated, opened and used Trilogy Elipta inhaler. The manufacturer's instruction on outside of box read to discard 6 weeks after opening.- one undated, opened and used Nystatin Cream tube. The manufacturer's instruction stated to discard 14 days after opening.- one undated, opened and used bottle of Clotrimazole Betamethasone Dipropionate. The manufacturer's instruction stated to discard 6 months after opening. - on undated, opened and used bottle of…

    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 · E2025-02-12 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — pattern
    Ensure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
    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, Nurse Practitioner and Medical Director interviews, the facility failed to clarify a physician order for phenytoin (a medication used to treat epilepsy and manage seizures) for a resident with a diagnosis of generalized epilepsy (a brain disorder that causes seizures) which resulted in the phenytoin not being administered for 19 days. This deficient practice was identified for 1 of 1 residents reviewed for significant medication error (Resident #287). The findings included: Resident #287 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included generalized epilepsy and stroke. Resident #287 had a physician order dated 4/11/24 for phenytoin sodium extended 100 milligram (mg) capsule. Give 100 mg by mouth twice a day on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Friday, Saturday, and Sunday for generalized epilepsy. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) quarterly assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #287 had moderate cognitive impairment. Resident #287 had a care plan in place, last…

    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 · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-02-12 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on observations and staff interviews, the facility failed to maintain kitchen equipment clean and in a sanitary condition to prevent cross contamination by failing to clean seven of nine baking sheets. These practices had the potential to affect food served to residents. The findings included: During an observation of the kitchen dish drying rack on 2/05/25 at 11:37 AM, seven stacked baking sheets with dark dried grease built up under the rim. A second observation on 2/06/25 at 10:35 AM revealed 7 baking sheets stacked ready for use on the rolling food preparation rack were in the same condition. In an interview with the Dietary Manager on 2/06/25 at 10:42 AM he revealed staff should have cleaned and gotten all the grease built up off the baking sheets. In an interview on 2/06/25 at 10:53 AM the Administrator stated that dietary should maintain their cleaning schedule and deep clean the baking sheets.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-02-12 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to implement their infection prevention program policies and procedures when 1) the Social Worker failed to remove her surgical mask after exiting a resident room that was on droplet precautions (room [ROOM NUMBER]), 2) when the Maintenance Director failed to wear a surgical mask in a resident room that was on droplet precautions (room [ROOM NUMBER]), and 3) Nurse Aide #1 failed to remove her surgical mask after exiting a resident room on droplet precautions (room [ROOM NUMBER]). This deficient practice was observed for 3 of 3 staff members (Social Worker, Maintenance Director, and NA #1) that failed to follow droplet precaution procedures for residents on isolation for influenza. The findings included: The facility's policy titled Infection Prevention and Control Program last revised June 2023 noted the program was a facility-wide effort involving all disciplines and individuals and is an integral part of the quality assurance and…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-02-12 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to develop a person-centered care plan for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for hearing impairment (Resident #75). The findings included: Resident #75 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #75 was hospitalized on [DATE] and returned to the facility on 1/13/25. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) admission assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #75 had moderate cognitive impairment and was coded for minimal hearing difficulty with the use of hearing aids. Review of the care plan revealed no care plan related to Resident #75's hearing impairment and use of hearing aids. An interview and observation were conducted on 2/03/25 at 2:15 pm with Resident #75. This surveyor had to move close and speak loudly within one to three inches of the right ear for Resident #75 to hear questions. Resident #75 reported she was very hard of hearing, and she did not have her hearing aids today. Resident #75's hearing aids were observed…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-02-12 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to secure indwelling urinary catheter tubing to prevent tugging or pulling for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for indwelling urinary catheters (Resident #53). The findings included: Resident #53 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included neurogenic bladder (a condition that occurs when the nervous system connection to the bladder is disrupted) with urinary retention. Review of a physician's order dated 12/4/24 read in part; Check placement of catheter securement every shift. Resident #53's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed she had moderate cognitive impairment. She was coded as having an indwelling urinary catheter. An interview was conducted with Resident #53 on 02/03/25 at 11:35 AM. Resident #53 stated she had experienced pain from her urinary catheter when she was up in the chair. Resident #53 stated a leg strap was placed to secure the catheter tubing which helped…

    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 · Ecited before2023-12-13 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on observations, and staff interviews the facility failed to maintain kitchen equipment clean by failing to clean 1 of 1 plate warmer and 1 of 1 knife holder observed. This practice has the potential for cross contamination of food served to residents. The findings included: a. Observations of the kitchen were conducted on 12/1023 at 10:05 AM, and 12/12/23 at 12:18 PM the three cylinder well plate warmer was observed with dark black dried food particles inside each well. b. Observations of the kitchen conducted on 12/12/23 at 12:18 PM and 12/13/23 at 9:07AM revealed a buildup of dried food particles on top of the wall mounted magnetic knife holder. During an interview with the Dietary Manager on 12/13/23 at 9:08 AM he stated he would add the plate warmer to the cleaning schedule and start daily cleaning audits. In an interview on 12/13/23 at 9:15 AM the Administrator stated she would have the kitchen do daily audits and keep the plate warmer clean.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-12-13 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — pattern
    Set up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review, observations, and staff interviews, the facility's Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) Committee failed to maintain implemented procedures and monitor interventions that the committee had previously put in place following the recertification and complaint investigations on 4/15/21 and 11/10/22. The deficiencies included: Care Plan Timing and Revision (F657) and Food Procurement/Store/Prepare/Serve Sanitary (F812). The continued failure during two or more federal surveys of record showed a pattern of the facility's inability to sustain an effective Quality Assurance Program. Findings included: This tag is cross-referenced to: F657: Based on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to update a resident's care plan for a resident with impaired swallowing for 1 of 20 residents whose care plans were reviewed (Resident #7). During the recertification and complaint survey of 4/15/21, the facility was cited for failure to update a resident's Care Plan to include transfers with a mechanical lift. An interview was conducted on 12/13/23 at 1:41 P.M.…

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

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-12-13 · 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 complete the Minimum Data Set (MDS) for dialysis for 1 of 20 residents reviewed for MDS assessments. (Resident #61) Findings Included: Resident #61 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis that included end stage renal disease. Physician order dated 10/31/23 read dialysis days are Monday Wednesday, and Friday. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated Resident #61 did not receive dialysis. An interview was conducted on 12/12/23 at 11:32 A.M. with the MDS nurse. The MDS nurse reviewed the admission MDS and confirmed it was inaccurate. The MDS nurse stated when she completed Resident #61 admission MDS, she overlooked Resident #61 received dialysis and she stated Resident #61's admission MDS should have been marked to show Resident #61 received dialysis treatment. An interview was conducted on 12/13/23 at 10:11 A.M. with the Director of Nursing (DON). During the interview, the DON confirmed…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-12-13 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
    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 update a resident's care plan for a resident with impaired swallowing for 1 of 20 residents whose care plans were reviewed (Resident #7). The findings included: Resident #7 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis that included acute respiratory disease and dysphagia (difficulty swallowing foods or liquids). Resident #7's physician order dated 8/11/23 read NPO (nothing by mouth). Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] showed Resident #7 was severely cognitively impaired, he had a swallowing disorder of loss of liquids/solids when eating, coughing/choking when eating, and received 51% or more through a feeding tube. Review of Resident #7's care plan last updated 11/16/23 showed a focus area Resident #7 had impaired swallowing related to dysphagia with potential for aspiration. Interventions included to encourage resident to eat/drink slowly, encourage resident to eat meals out of his room, monitor and report…

    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
  • No harm found · C2026-04-10 · tag F0732 — widespread
    Post nurse staffing information every day.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to post accurate licensed and unlicensed nursing staffing data for 28 of 31 days reviewed for sufficient staffing (3/08/26, 3/09/26, 3/10/26, 3/11/26, 3/12/26, 3/14/26, 3/15/26, 3/16/26, 3/17/26, 3/18/26, 3/19/26, 3/20/26, 3/21/26, 3/22/26, 3/23/26, 3/24/26, 3/25/26, 3/26/26, 3/27/26, 3/28/26, 3/30/26, 3/31/26, 4/01/26, 4/03/26, 4/04/26, 4/05/26, 4/06/26, and 4/07/26).The findings included:A review of the posted Report of Nursing Staff Directly Responsible, the daily staffing schedule, and the Salaried Employee Sheet from 03/08/26 through 04/07/26 revealed the following:a. A review of the daily nursing schedule form for the 7:00 am-3:00 pm shift revealed the licensed and unlicensed nursing staff was not recorded accurately for the following days:3/08/26-Report of Nursing Staff Directly Responsible for recorded 0 Registered Nurse (RN), 4 Licensed Practical Nurses (LPN), and 11 Nurse Aides (NA); the daily staffing schedule recorded one (1) RN, 3 LPN, and 10 NA.3/09/26- Report of Nursing Staff Directly Responsible for…

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

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · No revisit needed
  • No harm found · Bcited before2026-04-10 · tag F0641 — pattern
    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 areas of use of a wander/elopement alarm (Resident #11) and the use of anticoagulant medication (Resident #10) for 2 of 25 residents whose MDS assessments were reviewed. The findings included: 1. Resident #10 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included hypertension. A physician order dated 2/20/26 for clopidogrel (an antiplatelet medication) 75 milligram (mg) give one tablet by mouth daily was observed in Resident #10's record. No anticoagulant medication had been ordered. Review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) for February 2026 revealed Resident #10 received clopidogrel 75 mg daily as ordered. No anticoagulant medication had been received. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] noted Resident #10 had been taking anticoagulant medication during the assessment period. The MDS did not include antiplatelet medication use during…

    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 · No revisit needed
  • No harm found · B2023-12-13 · tag F0640 — pattern
    Encode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of 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 transmit the discharge Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments for 11 of 13 residents reviewed for discharge. (Resident #77, Resident #38, Resident #11, Resident #52, Resident #55, Resident #33, Resident #34, Resident #73, Resident #26, Resident #22, Resident #4). The findings included: a) Resident #77 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. On 12/13/23 Resident # 77's discharge assessment with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD, the last day of the 7-day lookback period) of 6/15/23 was observed in the electronic medical record as completed and not transmitted. b) Resident #38 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. On 12/13/23 Resident # 38's discharge assessment with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD, the last day of the 7-day lookback period) of 8/3/23 observed in the electronic medical record as completed and not transmitted. c) Resident #11 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. On 12/13/23 Resident # 11's discharge assessment with an Assessment…

    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
  • No harm found · B2023-12-13 · tag F0655 — pattern
    Create and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interviews the facility failed to develop a baseline care plan within 48 hours after admission for 2 of 20 residents (Resident #7 and Resident #78) for care planning. The findings included: 1. Resident #7 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included acute respiratory disease, dysphagia (difficulty swallowing foods or liquids), and acute kidney failure. Resident #7's electronic medical record revealed a baseline care plan was developed on 2/6/23 and showed completed on 2/7/23. An interview was conducted on 12/12/23 at 11:23 A.M. with the MDS nurse. During the interview, the MDS nurse stated the baseline care plan was completed by the nursing staff within 48 hours from the time a resident was admitted into the facility. The MDS nurse was unable to provide a reason why Resident #7's baseline care plan was not developed within 48 hours of admission. An interview was conducted on 12/13/23 at 11:03 A.M. with Nurse #1 who admitted Resident #7. During 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has plan 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

$16,984 in federal fines across 2 penalties.

  • $8,492 — penalty dated 2025-06-26
  • $8,492 — penalty dated 2025-06-26

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 SANSTONE HEALTH & REHABILITATION — 18 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 3 of 54.2-1.2 vs chain
Health inspection 3 of 53.9-0.9 vs chain
Staffing 2 of 52.7-0.7 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 54.3-0.3 vs chain
The other 17 homes this chain runs (chain average 4.2★, per CMS)

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
ARDENT HEALTH AND REHABILITATION COOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 05/01/2014
SPRENGER, CHRISTOPHERIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICERNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 05/01/2014
POWELL, COLLEENIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 07/13/2020

CMS files one row per role, so the 4 rows in the source record cover these 3 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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.

$15.8M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+13.5%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$3.4M
Related-party expense25% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 50%Medicare 28%Other / private 22%

This home reported $3.4M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 25% 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

$407per resident / day
operating cost
$12,380per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$471per 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 345137. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-10, 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