Autumn Care of Salisbury

Location & what’s nearby

Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

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

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

54.9% 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 133 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 48.9% 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 88 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 0.39 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 66% 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 97 beds and averages 89.1 residents a day — about 92% occupied, or roughly 8 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 3.24 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.548 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.80 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 2.74 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.44 on weekdays — 20% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.65 to 0.28 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 69% is well above the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.

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

Inspection trend

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

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

20 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 10 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-04-02 · 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 store, label and date food in 1 of 1 freezer reviewed for safe food handling. During an observation conducted with the Dietary Manager, multiple food items were observed removed from their original packaging, placed in resealable plastic bags without labeling, and lacked open and/or expiration dates. Additionally, food items in original packaging were observed without opening or expiration dates. These findings had the potential to affect the safety and quality of food served to residents. The findings included:During an initial kitchen tour of the walk-in freezer, conducted with the Dietary Manager on 03/30/2026 at 9:55 AM, the following concerns were identified:- One bag of french fries had been removed from the original packaging and placed in an unlabeled resealable plastic bag exposed to air, with no open date or expiration date.- Three sausages had been removed from the original packaging and placed in an unlabeled resealable plastic bag, with no open date or expiration date, and visible ice crystals present.-…

  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 · E2026-04-02 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — pattern
  Make sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review, observations, and staff interviews, the facility failed to secure cords from wall-mounted televisions which could cause a tripping hazard for 7 of 27 rooms (603,604, 605, 606, 607, 608, and 609) on 1 of 4 halls (600 hall).The findings included:The facility grievances were reviewed, and a grievance filed on 4/30/25 indicated that television cords from the wall-mounted televisions poised a tripping hazard.A purchase order form dated 5/5/25 indicated that ten (10) cord securement kits were approved on 5/5/25 by the former Administrator. An education in-service form dated 5/5/25 and presented by the former Administrator to the Maintenance Director indicated that while the television cords were not a safety concern, the cords should be kept close to the wall by cord securement system or by tying up cords.An audit conducted by the Maintenance Director on 5/7/25 indicated that 38 rooms required television cord securement. Included in the audit identified as needing TV cord securement were 27 rooms on the 600-hall including rooms 603,604, 605, 606, 607, 608, 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.

  Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-04-02 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews with the Power of Attorney (POA), staff, and the Nurse Practitioner (NP), the facility failed to ensure a resident's advance directive information was accurate and consistent throughout the medical record for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for advance directives (Resident #3). Resident #3 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #3's electronic health record (EHR) revealed the resident's code status was listed as full code in the EHR banner. Resident #3's care plan dated 1/9/2026 revealed Resident #3 was a full code. A discharge return anticipated [NAME] Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated Resident #3 was discharged to the hospital. An entry MDS dated [DATE] indicated Resident #3 was readmitted to the facility. A review of the Advance Directive dated 01/17/2026, initiated by the hospital physician, revealed the resident's code status was Do Not Resuscitate (DNR). An active physician's order initiated on 01/17/2026 indicated Resident #3's code status was Do Not…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-02 · 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 record review and staff, resident, and Urologist interviews, the facility failed to ensure a follow-up urology appointment was scheduled and completed as ordered for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for urinary catheter (Resident #39).Resident #39 was admitted to the facility on [DATE].Resident #39's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #39 was cognitively intact.A review of the hospital urology consult after-visit summary dated 01/13/2026 revealed Resident #39's suprapubic catheter was changed, with instructions to follow up on 02/10/2026 for routine catheter replacement.A review of Nurse #1's progress note dated 01/13/2026 revealed the suprapubic catheter was changed, and Resident #39 was to return for a urology follow up appointment on 02/10/2026.A phone interview was attempted with Nurse #1 on 03/30/2026 at 2:00 PM; however, no response was received.A physician's order dated 03/27/2026 indicated Resident #39 had an order to change the catheter as needed (PRN) if it…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-02 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolated
  Ensure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
  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, manufacturer's instructions, and interviews with staff, Medical Director, and the Nurse Practitioner, the facility failed to dispose of single use feeding tube declogging devices contrary to manufacturer instructions, which increased the risk of contamination and infection (Resident #5) and failed to ensure a resident was administered the tube feeding formula specified in the physician order (Resident #37) for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for tube feeding (Resident #5 and Resident #37).The findings included: 1. Resident #5 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis of a history of gastrostomy tube (a flexible, hollow tube surgically placed through the abdomen into the stomach) for feeding and medication administration. She was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with orders to continue the use of her gastrostomy tube for feeding and medication administration. A quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] indicated severe cognitive impairment, presence 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-14 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolated
  Develop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, Resident Representative, Nurse Practitioner, and staff interviews, the facility failed to implement their abuse policy and procedures in the areas of reporting, investigation and protection after an allegation of abuse for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for abuse (Resident #1). The findings included:Review of the facility Resident Abuse Policy with the last revision date of 7/11/2024 revealed the following: It is the facility's policy to investigate all allegations, suspicions, and incidents of abuse, neglect, involuntary seclusion, exploitation of residents, misappropriation of resident property, and injuries of unknown source. Facility staff must immediately report all such allegations to the Administrator/Abuse Coordinator. The Administrator/Abuse Coordinator will immediately report begin an investigation and notify the applicable local and state agencies in accordance with the procedures in this policy.If a staff member is accused or suspected of abuse, neglect, mistreatment, exploitation,…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-03-06 · 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 observation and staff interviews, the facility failed to label and date leftover food items, remove food items with signs of spoilage and not store staff food in 1 of 2 nourishment room refrigerators (the 600 Hall nourishment room); and failed to remove expired food stored for use in 1 of 1 walk-in coolers. These practices had the potential to affect food served to residents. Findings included: 1. An observation and interview on the 600 hall nourishment room refrigerator conducted with Nurse Aide (NA) #4 and NA #5 on 03/03/25 at 10:45 AM revealed a bag of croutons not labeled or dated, a quart size sealed plastic bag with strawberries and blueberries that were observed to have discoloration and with fuzzy white substance, a microwavable dinner tray not labeled or dated of meat and broccoli observed to have discoloration and fuzzy substance on the food, a unlabeled and undated plastic container with white substance that resembled mold, and NA #4's lunch bag. NA #4 revealed she put her lunch in the fridge but was aware that it should not be in there. NA #4 and NA #5 nursing…

  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 · D2025-03-06 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record reviews, and residents and staff interviews, the facility failed to honor residents' preferences for a shower for 3 of 3 residents reviewed for choices (Resident #32, Resident #77, and Resident# 24.) The findings included: 1a. Resident #32 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including dementia. The annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] assessed Resident #32 to be moderately cognitively impaired. The MDS assessed Resident #32 to require substantial assistance with showering/bathing. The MDS documented Resident #32 said it was very important to choose between a shower and a sponge bath. Review of the facility shower schedule revealed Resident #32 (who resided on the 200 hall) was scheduled for a shower on Tuesday and Friday. The Activities of Daily Living log for Resident #32 was reviewed and it was noted on Friday 2/28/25 she did not receive a shower. Resident #32 was interviewed on 3/3/25 at 2:23 PM and she reported she did not get a shower on 2/28/25 and this…

  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 · D2025-03-06 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
  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 Responsible Party and staff interviews, the facility failed to make prompt efforts to resolve a grievance 1 of 3 residents reviewed for grievances (Resident #72). The findings included: The facility grievance policy dated 11/2016 and revised 8/2018 read, in part: Upon receipt of an oral, written or anonymous grievance . the Grievance Official will take immediate action to prevent further potential violations of any resident right while the alleged violation is being investigated, if indicated; .the Grievance Committee/Grievance Official shall complete an investigation of the resident's grievance. This may include a review of the facility processes, programs, and policies, as well as interview with staff, residents and visitors, as indicated; Upon completion of the review, the Grievance Official will complete a written grievance decision that includes the following: the date the grievance was received, the summary of the statement of the resident' grievance, the steps taken 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 · D2025-03-06 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
  Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interviews the facility failed to protect a resident's right to be free from staff to resident abuse. While Nurse Aide (NA) #6 and NA #7 were providing care for a cognitively impaired resident, the resident became agitated. NA #7 slapped the resident on the left upper thigh and NA #6 held the residents' hands during care while the resident was agitated and being combative. This deficient practice was found for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for abuse (Resident #3). The findings included: Resident #3 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included cerebral infarction, major depressive disorder, dementia, contracture right knee, and contracture to left knee. Review of Resident #3's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #3 was severely cognitively impaired and required extensive assistance with two people assist for bed mobility and transfers. The MDS further revealed Resident #3 was not coded for any behaviors. Review of Resident #3's care…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

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

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

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 30 rows in the source record cover these 17 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

This home reported $1.4M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 13% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

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