Autumn Care of Saluda
501 Esseola Circle, Saluda, NC 28773 · For profit - Corporation · 99 certified beds · (828) 749-2261 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- it has abuse, neglect, or exploitation citations (F0600, F0602) — most recent Feb 2025
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0565)
- inspectors recorded 5 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 (18) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $16,801 in federal fines (most recent 2024-05-16)
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (69%) runs well above the national median (45%)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
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
| 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 held steady at 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.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 22.9% | 15.6% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 4.9% | 7.2% | 5.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 2.1% | 0.7% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.3% | 2.3% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 6.1% | 5.9% | 6.5% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 2.4% | 3.5% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 24.4% | 18.3% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 19.9% | 21.3% | 18.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 94.1% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 6.5% | 5.5% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 23.2% | 20.7% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 13.9% | 14.0% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.7% | 1.4% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 92.6% | 78.1% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 5.7% | 22.9% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 10.0% | 12.9% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 0.94 | 1.78 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.32 | 1.80 | 1.80 | better |
‡ 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.
41.2% 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 41 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 53.9% 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 39 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 0.34 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 58% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 24% 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
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 41.2%CMS range 30.6–54.5 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.3%CMS range 7.2–14.5 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no 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 discharge | 53.9% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 discharge | 53.9% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 43.6% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 identified | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 setting | not 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 discharge | not 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 stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.7%CMS range 4.2–12.4 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.71 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS 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
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 99 beds and averages 88.4 residents a day — about 89% occupied, or roughly 11 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 3.65 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.66 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.15 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.33 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.79 on weekdays — 12% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.74 to 0.48 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%.
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 unchanged from the previous inspection. 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.
18 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2024-05-16 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately 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, staff, Nurse Practitioner (NP), and Medical Doctor (MD) interviews, the facility failed to notify the physician of a fall when they reported a change in condition to the physician for a severely cognitively impaired resident on blood thinner. In addition, the physician was not notified when there was a delay in a STAT (immediately without delay) x-ray order of the left hip for a resident with a decrease in range of motion in her left hip and pain. The STAT x-ray order was ordered on [DATE] at 12:48 PM and not obtained until [DATE] that showed an acute fracture of the left hip at the intertrochanteric region (the area near the hip joint). On [DATE] Resident #1 underwent surgery to repair the left hip fracture. On [DATE] Resident #1 was discharged from the hospital to hospice care and Resident #1 expired on [DATE]. This practice occurred for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for notification of change (Resident #1). Findings included: Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with 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.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2024-05-16 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect 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 observation, record review, and staff, Nurse Practitioner, and Medical Doctor interviews, the facility failed to protect a resident's right to be free from neglect when staff disregarded Resident #1's plan of care and transferred the resident without the use of a total mechanical lift and two-person assistance. During the first transfer Resident #1 was assisted to the floor. The following day ([DATE]) the Nurse Practitioner was asked to assess Resident #1 due to her left foot dragging on the floor and x-ray results revealed an acute fracture of the left hip. On [DATE] Resident #1 underwent surgery to repair the left hip fracture. On [DATE] Resident #1 was discharged from the hospital to hospice care and Resident #1 expired on [DATE]. Findings included: This tag is crossed referred to F 689. Based on observation, record review, and staff, Nurse Practitioner, and Medical Doctor interviews, the facility failed to safely transfer a resident from the toilet to the shower chair when one staff member used 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.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2024-05-16 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide 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 Medical Doctor (MD), Nurse Practitioner (NP) and staff interviews, the facility failed to assess Resident #1 by a nurse after a fall and prior to getting her off the floor. Additionally, the facility failed to ensure a STAT (immediate) order for x-ray was executed resulting in delayed care. On 4/24/24 Nurse Aide (NA) #1 transferred Resident #1 from her bed to the sit to stand lift and transported Resident #1 to the shower room. During a transfer in the shower room from the toilet to the sit-to-stand lift Resident #1's foot slipped and NA #1 had to lower Resident #1 to the floor. NA #1 called for assistance from NA #2. NA #1 and NA #2 did not notify the Nurse that Resident #1 had fallen. An assessment for injury was not completed by a Nurse prior to Resident #1 being moved. On 4/25/24 the NP placed a STAT order for left hip x-ray at 2:00 PM. The facility was made aware there was a delay in the STAT x-ray and did not inform the NP. The results of the x-ray were available on 4/26/24 at…
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.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2024-05-16 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and staff, Nurse Practitioner, and Medical Doctor interviews, the facility failed to safely transfer a resident from the toilet to the shower chair when one staff member used the sit to stand mechanical lift instead of the total mechanical lift resulting in the resident falling to the floor for 1 of 3 sampled residents reviewed for accidents (Resident #1). On [DATE] Nurse Aide (NA) #1 transferred Resident #1 independently using a sit to stand mechanical lift. Resident #1's care plan indicated the resident required use of a total mechanical lift with 2-person assistance. During the transfer from the toilet to the sit to stand mechanical lift, Resident #1's foot slipped, and NA #1 had to lower Resident #1 to the floor. NA #1 requested help from NA #2 and they both assisted Resident #1 off the floor without using a mechanical lift. Transfers continued without using the total mechanical lift and assistance from two people. On [DATE] NA #2 reported to the Nurse Practitioner (NP)…
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.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2024-05-16 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — isolatedEnsure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
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 ensure all nursing staff, including agency staff, received orientation to include the location of resident care guides or the [NAME] (nurse aide guide that contains individualized care information) and verify competencies including resident transfers and total and sit to stand lifts prior to providing care for the residents in the facility. On [DATE] Nurse Aide (NA) #1 transferred Resident #1 independently using a sit to stand mechanical lift. Resident #1's care plan indicated the resident required use of a total mechanical lift with 2-person assistance. During the transfer from the toilet to the sit to stand mechanical lift, Resident #1's foot slipped, and NA #1 had to lower Resident #1 to the floor. NA #1 requested help from NA #2 and they both assisted Resident #1 off the floor without using a mechanical lift. Transfers continued without using the total mechanical lift and assistance from two people. On [DATE] x-ray results for Resident #1…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-23 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure 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 pressure ulcers for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for pressure ulcers (Resident #2).Findings included:Resident #2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE].Review of Resident #2's admission skin assessment dated [DATE] identified a pressure ulcer located on sacrum (the bone at the base of spine and top inner area of the buttock). The stage of the pressure ulcer was not included in the assessment. Review of a nurse's progress note dated 01/07/26 revealed Resident #2 had a reddened area on the bilateral inner/top area of the buttock that was covered with foam dressing.Review of Resident #2's Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed a physician's order was transcribed with directions to cleanse the bilateral inner area on the buttock with normal saline and apply a foam border dressing. The treatment was initialed by the nurse to indicate it was done on 01/08/26.Review of a nurse's…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-23 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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 staff interviews, the facility failed to complete quarterly smoking risk assessments (assessment of a resident to determine if they are safe to smoke where a score between 0-9 indicates a resident was a safe smoker) for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for smoking (Resident #54).The findings included:Resident #54 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included mood disorder, nicotine dependence, and muscle weakness. Review of the facility's smoking policy dated 09/09/25 revealed a smoking risk assessment must be completed upon admission, quarterly, and upon changes in the resident's condition.Review of Resident #54's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident was cognitively intact and coded for tobacco use.Review of Resident #54's quarterly MDS dated [DATE] revealed the resident was cognitively intact and independent for most activities of daily living (ADL). The MDS indicated Resident #54 was independent for ambulation.…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-08 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and staff and Nurse Practitioner (NP) interviews, the facility failed to effectively supervise a cognitively impaired resident when the resident was able to exit the facility unsupervised and without staff knowledge for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for supervisions to prevent accidents (Resident #1). Findings included: Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis that included dementia, bipolar disorder, panic disorder, and anxiety disorder.Review of the annual minimum data set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed that Resident #1 was severely cognitively impaired. He displayed no wandering behavior during the look back period and needed supervision with mobility and transfers. Resident #1 had no falls and needed supervision with ambulation. Review of the care plan started on 12/9/24 and last updated on 12/16/25 revealed that Resident #1 waws at risk of elopement- wandering in facility I'm gonna walk out the door - may stand by exit doors, may try to follow behind…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2025-02-14 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — patternProtect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
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, observations, and interviews with residents and staff, the facility failed to protect the resident's right to be free from misappropriation of controlled narcotic pain medications for 3 of 4 residents reviewed for misappropriation of property (Resident #46, #1, and #18). Findings included: The facility's Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation policy, last revised 7/11/24 revealed the facility would not tolerate misappropriation of resident property defined as the deliberate misplacement, exploitation, or wrongful, temporary, or permanent use of resident's belongings without consent. a. Resident #46 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #46's diagnoses included osteoarthritis and right hip pain. A physician's order dated 4/9/24 revealed Resident #46 received hydrocodone-acetaminophen (a combination of a narcotic opioid analgesic and a non-narcotic medication used to relieve pain) 5-325 milligram (mg) tablet before meals and at bedtime for right hip pain. The significant change in…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-02-14 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure 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 discard potentially hazardous food with signs of spoilage in 1 of 1 walk-in refrigerators, date food items available for residents in 1 of 1 kitchen refrigerators and discard damaged canned goods available for use. This practice had the potential to affect food served to residents. Findings included: a. An observation of the walk-in refrigerator on 02/26/24 at 08:56 AM revealed the following: - A box containing cucumbers with a received date of 12/31/24 that was shriveled with white on the surface. - A box of green bell peppers with a received date of 1/14/25 that was shriveled with black on the surface. b. An observation of the kitchen refrigerator on 02/26/24 at 08:56 AM revealed the following: - 1 ham and cheese sandwich and 1 peanut butter and jelly sandwich that were not dated. c. An observation of the canned goods rack on 02/11/25 at 10:00 AM revealed the following: - An unopened can of catsup with a dent approximately 3 inches wide across the front of it available for use. An interview on 02/11/25 at 10:01 AM…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-12-12 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect 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 interviews with staff, Nurse Practitioner (NP), Director of Nursing (DON) and Administrator, the facility failed to protect the resident's right (Resident #1) to be free of abuse when Resident #2's family member (facility Housekeeper) pulled Resident #2's TV remote from Resident #1's hands. Resident #1 sustained a fracture of his left index finger that required no surgical intervention. This deficient practice occurred for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for abuse. Findings Included: Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including stroke, paralysis of the right side and legal blindness. Resident #1's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] coded Resident #1 as severely cognitively impaired with no behaviors noted. Resident #1 was care planned (2/7/23) for altered or at risk for altered behaviors and/ or mood with a history of yelling, cursing, paranoid, history of cycling through roommates, history of many room changes due to anger, and behavior. Resident…
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.
- Potential for harm · F2023-11-01 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — widespreadEnsure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on a lunch meal tray line observation, record review, and staff interviews the facility failed to serve correct portions of food according to the planned menus. This failure had the potential to affect 61 residents receiving a regular diet texture and 6 residents receiving a pureed diet texture. Findings included: 1. The menu for the lunch meal on 10/31/23 for residents receiving a regular texture diet was 2 ounces of baked chicken, a half-cup of au-gratin potatoes, and a half-cup of mixed vegetables. A continuous observation of the lunch meal tray line on 10/31/23 from 12:00 PM through 12:55 PM revealed [NAME] #2 began plating food and used tongs to place a mixture of bone-in and boneless chicken thighs for residents receiving a regular diet texture. There was no consistent size to the pieces of chicken thighs being served. In an interview with the Dietary Manager on 10/31/23 at 12:05 PM she confirmed the chicken being served at the lunch meal was a mixture of boneless and bone-in chicken thighs. When the surveyor asked her how she could verify residents were receiving 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.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2023-11-01 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure 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 maintain a clean floor and walls and label and date food and beverage items in 1 of 1 walk-in cooler; maintain a clean floor, cover food, and store food items off the floor for 1 of 1 walk-in freezer; date food items, store food off the floor, and remove expired food in 1 of 1 dry goods storage room; maintain clean stove, oven, shelves, and floor in 1 of 1 kitchen; cover, label, and date open beverage and food items, discard food with signs of spoilage, and maintain a clean reach-in cooler for 1 of 1 reach-in cooler; cover, label, and date food items and maintain a clean reach-in freezer for 1 of 1 reach-in freezer; restrain facial hair during food preparation; maintain 1 of 1 garbage disposal in working order; and ensure food items were labeled and dated in 1 of 2 nourishment rooms (A/B hall). Findings included: 1. An initial tour of the walk-in cooler on 10/29/23 at 10:27 AM revealed the following: (a). multiple dried brown stains were observed on the floor and multiple areas of a black/brown substance to all walls…
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.
- Potential for harm · F2023-11-01 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — widespreadSet 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 observations, record review, and staff interviews, the facility's Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) Committee failed to maintain implemented procedures and monitor the interventions that the committee put into place following the recertification and complaint investigation survey completed on 05/12/22. This was for one repeat deficiency originally cited in the area of food procurement-store/prepare/serve that was subsequently recited on the current recertification and complaint investigation survey of 11/01/23. The continued failure of the facility during two federal surveys of record shows a pattern of the facility's inability to sustain an effective Quality Assessment and Assurance Program. The findings included: This tag is cross referenced to: F 812: Based on observations and staff interviews the facility failed to maintain a clean floor and walls and label and date food and beverage items in 1 of 1 walk-in cooler; maintain a clean floor, cover food, and store food items off the floor for 1 of 1 walk-in freezer; date food items, store food off the floor, and remove…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2023-11-01 · tag F0565 — failed to support the resident council — patternHonor the resident's right to organize and participate in resident/family groups in the facility.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to resolve and communicate the facility's efforts to address repeated dietary and staffing concerns voiced by residents during Resident Council meetings for 7 of 9 months reviewed (February 2023, April 2023, May 2023, June 2023, July 2023, September 2023, and October 2023). Findings included: The Resident Council minutes for the period January 2023 through October 2023 were reviewed and revealed the following: • Resident Council minutes dated 02/22/23 noted in part, residents voiced staffing concerns that third shift agency staff talked loudly in the halls, did not answer call lights, and wore ear buds to talk on their cellphones. In addition, food on the meal trays were served cold and ice cream was not kept cold. • Resident Council minutes dated 03/29/23 noted the staffing and dietary concerns voiced during the previous month's meeting were reviewed and reported as resolved. There were no new staffing or dietary concerns noted as voiced during the meeting. • Resident Council minutes dated 04/26/23 noted in…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-11-01 · tag F0554 — isolatedAllow 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, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to assess the ability of a resident to self-administer medications for 1 of 4 sampled residents observed with medications at bedside (Resident #64). Findings included: Resident #64 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His diagnoses included congestive heart failure, diabetes, and left shoulder pain. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #64 had intact cognition. Review of the medical record revealed no documentation that Resident #64 was assessed for self-administration of medications. During an observation and interview on 10/31/23 at 1:05 PM, Resident #64 was sitting up on the side of his bed with the overbed table pulled directly in front of him and placed on top of the overbed table was his lunch tray and a medicine cup containing 2 round white pills. Resident #64 explained earlier that morning he had 3 teeth pulled and the pills in the medicine cup were the Tylenol he requested for pain…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-11-01 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure 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 Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments in the areas of Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) and wandering behavior for 3 of 22 sampled residents reviewed (Residents #10, #26 and #83). Findings included: 1. Resident #10 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with multiple diagnoses that included anxiety disorder and depression. a. Review of an undated North Carolina Medicaid Uniform Screening Tool (NC MUST) inquiry document revealed Resident #10 had a time-limited Level II PASRR with an effective date of 09/02/22 and expiration date of 10/02/22. The admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #10 was not currently considered by the state Level II PASRR process to have a serious mental illness and/or intellectual disability or other related conditions. b. Review of an undated NC MUST inquiry document revealed Resident #10 was re-evaluated on 02/06/23 by PASRR due to a change of condition and issued a new…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-11-01 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY 2. Resident #9 was admitted to the facility 02/11/20 with diagnoses including heart failure and quadriplegia (paralysis that affects all four limbs). The annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #9 was cognitively intact. Review of Resident #9's physician orders revealed no current order for the use of zinc oxide cream. During observations on 10/29/23 at 12:42 PM, 10/20/23 at 8:27 AM, 10/31/23 at 8:46 AM, and 11/01/23 at 8:14 AM, in clear view on top of a shelf in Resident #9's room was a 15-ounce container of medicated cream with the active ingredient 25% zinc oxide. An interview with Resident #9 on 10/29/23 at 12:43 PM revealed the zinc cream was applied by staff but had not been applied for a while. An observation and interview were conducted on 11/01/23 at 4:22 PM with the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON observed the medicated cream on the shelf and explained it could not be kept in Resident #9's room. She stated a physician order would need to be in place for the use of zinc oxide…
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.
“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.
- 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.
Fines & penalties
$16,801 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $16,801 — penalty dated 2024-05-16
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to SABER HEALTHCARE GROUP — 126 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 2 of 5 | 2.9 | -0.9 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 2.6 | -0.6 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 2.2 | +0.8 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 4.0 | ≈ chain avg |
The other 125 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.9★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 125; lowest-rated first.
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SHG AUTUMN, LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 03/01/2016 |
| VOLPE, BENJAMIN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/01/2019 |
| WEISBERG, WILLIAM | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 03/01/2019 |
| NICOLUZAKIS, GREGORY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/01/2019 |
| SABER GOVERNANCE LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 09/01/2019 |
| PARSONS, BRIAN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/14/2022 |
| CIBC BANK USA | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/31/2021 |
| CITRIN COOPERMAN ADVISORS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/01/2016 |
| WALKER & ASSOCIATES PC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/18/2023 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 14 rows in the source record cover these 9 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
5 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.
About 81% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $1.2M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 12% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
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
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.
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 345351. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-23, 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.