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

Cleveland Pines

1404 N Lafayette Street, Shelby, NC 28150 · For profit - Corporation · 120 certified beds · (980) 487-1500 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (980) 487-1500 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citation — no harm found (F0607) — cited Nov 2025
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)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
Worth asking about
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
  • about 19% 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
★★★ 3/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
1403 N Lafayette St · (704) 482-1447 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
701 E Grover St · (704) 487-1971 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
1305 Fallston Rd · (704) 480-9616 · Call to confirm hours
Park
1655 McBrayer Springs Rd · (704) 484-6821 · 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 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 2 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 4 to 3 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 rating3★
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 increased24.5%15.6%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight3.1%7.2%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.4%0.7%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection2.5%2.3%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.3%5.9%6.5%better
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.0%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury1.4%3.5%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened18.9%18.3%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication27.4%21.3%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%94.1%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers3.7%5.5%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control27.4%20.7%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table4.9%14.0%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%1.4%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine93.8%78.1%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission27.3%22.9%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit11.3%12.9%12.0%typical
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.071.781.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.601.801.80better

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

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

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

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

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

58.4% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 81 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

58.4%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
9.3%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
32.8%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.22U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.10hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.07hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.05hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 32.8% 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 64 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 0.22 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 27% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 8% 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 SNF58.4%CMS range 48.7–66.851.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF9.3%CMS range 6.0–13.310.7%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 discharge32.8%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 discharge31.2%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 discharge32.8%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified57.5%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 setting39.5%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 discharge66.7%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 worsened3.5%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.1%CMS range 3.8–12.77.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.771.02Oct 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

0.31
RN hours/ resident / day
0.65
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.99
Aide hours/ resident / day
2.96
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.22
RN hoursweekends
43.3%
Total nursing turnover
41.7%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 120 beds and averages 102.4 residents a day — about 85% occupied, or roughly 18 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 2.96 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.31 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.99 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 2.01 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.34 on weekdays — 40% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.35 to 0.22 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 43% 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

6
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-11-18)
4
at the previous standard inspection (2024-07-18)

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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

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

  • Potential for harm · E2025-11-18 · tag F0687 — failed to care for feet properly — pattern
    Provide appropriate foot care.
    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 and Nurse Practitioner (NP) interviews, the facility failed to ensure resident's toenails were trimmed and podiatry services were arranged for 3 of 7 residents reviewed for foot care (Resident #15, Resident #90, and Resident #24). The findings included: 1. Resident #15 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included traumatic brain injury and contractures to bilateral upper and lower extremities. Review of revised care plan dated 6/15/25 revealed Resident #15 was care planned for activities of daily living (ADL) self-care performance deficits related to her disease process. Resident #15 was dependent on staff for all ADL care. Review of quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #15 was severely cognitively impaired and had been assessed as requiring total care assistance from staff with all ADL care. Resident #15 was also coded as having no refusals with care. Review 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 · E2025-11-18 · tag F0700 — pattern
    Try different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record reviews, and Nurse Practitioner and staff interviews, the facility failed to review risks and benefit of side rails use with the resident or resident representative prior to installation, failed to obtain informed consent, and failed to accurately assess 5 of 8 severely cognitively impaired residents for the use of bilateral half side rails on their beds (Resident #3, Resident #9, and Resident #15, Resident #39, Resident #35). Findings included: 1. Resident #3 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included bilateral above knee amputation, cerebrovascular accident (stroke), tonic-clonic seizure disorder, chronic anticoagulation, and altered mental status. Resident #3's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed she was severely cognitively impaired, unable to make her needs known and staff had to anticipate her needs daily. The assessment also revealed she required extensive assistance of 2 staff members for bed mobility, and she was on a…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-11-18 · 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 and staff interviews, the facility failed to complete a thorough investigation of an allegation of resident-to-resident abuse for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for abuse (Residents #9). Findings included: The facility's Prohibit and Prevent Violations of Resident Abuse, Neglect, Misappropriation of Resident Property and Exploitation policy indicated in part, all reports of resident abuse, neglect, exploitation, misappropriation of resident property, mistreatment and/ or injuries of unknown source (abuse) shall be promptly reported to local, state and federal agencies (as defined by current regulations) and thoroughly investigated by facility management. Findings of abuse investigations will also be reported. All resident to resident altercations must be reported in accordance with the regulations to include any willful action that results in physical injury, mental anguish, or pain. Should an incident or suspected incident of resident abuse, neglect, exploitation, mistreatment of residents, or…

    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 · D2025-11-18 · tag F0644 — isolated
    Coordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure a Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) Level II review was completed for residents with new mental health diagnoses for 2 of 4 residents (Resident #9 and Resident #43) reviewed for PASRR.The findings included: 1. Review of Resident #9's medical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a readmission on [DATE]. PASRR level I was completed on 9/07/17 prior to admission with a recommendation to resubmit paperwork for PASRR level II if a new mental health diagnosis was suspected or if there was a significant change in the resident's condition. The electronic medical record revealed Resident #9 was diagnosed with anxiety disorder on 9/09/17, mood affective disorder on 8/01/23, and schizophrenia on 10/24/24. No PASRR level II was completed. During an interview on 9/26/25 at 5:35 PM with the Administrator, she communicated her understanding that PASRR level II should be completed in a timely manner…

    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 · D2025-11-18 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record reviews, and staff interviews, the facility failed to follow their infection control standards and procedures when Nurse #6 failed to sanitize her hands and change her gloves between replacing the new tracheostomy (a surgically created opening in the windpipe through the neck to provide an airway for breathing) ties and neck collar and before cleaning the stoma and outer cannula and applying new disposable inner cannula and when Nurse #7 failed to sanitize her hands and change her gloves after inserting the new inner cannula and before cleaning around the stoma and outer cannula and placing the stoma dressing and new neck collar and ties. The deficient practice occurred for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for respiratory care (Resident #15 and Resident #39).The findings included:1. Resident #15 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included respiratory failure and tracheostomy status.Resident #15's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed she…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-11-18 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
    Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record reviews and interviews with staff, the facility failed to have effective systems in place for accurate reconciliation of controlled medications and maintaining accurate records of a resident's controlled medication declining count sheet for 1 of 6 residents reviewed for pharmacy services (Resident #46).The findings included:Review of the facility's Controlled Substances Distribution and Control Policy read in part:PROCEDURESD. A separate record will be maintained on each controlled substance in the form of a declining inventory record (Controlled Substance Sign-Out Sheet). Such record will be accurately maintained and will include: 6) The quantity of the controlled substance currently on hand.10) Such records will be reconciled to a physical count of the remaining doses at each shift change by two licensed nurses including the nurse taking charge of these controlled substances 11) Such record will be retained by the facility for a period of not less than three (3) years.Resident #46 was admitted…

    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 · E2024-07-18 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — pattern
    Provide activities to meet all resident's needs.
    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, facility activity calendars, and resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure group activities were planned for outside of the facility to meet the needs of residents who expressed that it was important to them to attend group activities outside of the facility for 6 of 8 residents reviewed for activities. (Residents #58, #8, #53, #20, #63, and #16). The residents expressed not being able to leave the facility for almost 2 years made them feel more dependent, sad, depressed, and they missed getting out with the group to shop and socialize with other people. The findings included: A review of the activity calendars for January 2024 through July 2024 revealed activities for inside of the facility or grounds during the week and some activities on the weekends. There were no activities scheduled for outside of the facility and grounds. Review of the Resident Council Meeting minutes for April 2023 through June 2024 revealed the residents requested in July 2023 and August 2023…

    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 · D2024-07-18 · 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 staff interviews, the facility failed to clarify and update the medical records to reflect the desired advance directive for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #64) reviewed for code status. The findings included: Resident #64 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A review of Resident #64's paper chart at the nurses' station revealed a paper copy of Resident #64's Medical Orders for Scope of Treatment (MOST) form dated 1/30/24 which indicated to attempt resuscitation with full scope of treatment. The MOST form was signed by Resident #64 and the Nurse Practitioner on 1/30/24. A review of Resident #64's electronic medical record indicated a physician's order dated 3/27/24 for Do Not Attempt Resuscitation (DNAR)/limited scope of treatment. A progress note in Resident #64's medical record dated 3/27/24 by the Medical Director (MD) indicated Resident #64's family wanted to keep her at facility for now and not to send to hospital. (The family) noted that they were aware of decline. (The MD)…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-07-18 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, resident, staff, and Nurse Practitioner interview the facility failed to follow physician's order to provide and apply a left resting hand splint to prevent further contracture for 1 of 3 resident reviewed for limited range of motion. (Resident #30) The findings included: Resident #30 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included hemiplegia and hemiparesis of left side and muscle weakness. A quarterly Minimum Data Set for Resident #30 dated 6/25/24 revealed the resident was cognitively intact with no refusals or rejection of care and no orthotic use documented. The care plan for Resident #30 updated on 6/25/24 revealed, Resident #30 had an Activities of Daily Living deficit related to physical functioning with weakness status post hemiplegia following a stroke. A review of the nurse practitioner order dated 4/29/24 revealed occupational therapy to evaluate and treat Resident #30 for left hand contracture, current left-hand splint provided would not fit…

    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 before2024-07-18 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record reviews, and staff interviews, the facility failed to implement their infection control policy for hand hygiene/handwashing, when the Treatment Nurse did not perform hand hygiene according to the facility's policy and procedure when she doffed her gloves after preparing her dressing for the wound and did not sanitize her hands before donning clean gloves to remove the old dressing from the wound for a resident (Resident #4). This occurred for 1 of 1 resident observed for wound care. The findings included: The facility's policy entitled Hand Hygiene last revised on 08/21/23 read in part: The hands are the conduits for almost every transfer of potential pathogens from one patient to another, from contaminated object to a patient, and from a staff member to a patient. Because of this, hand hygiene is the single most important procedure to prevent infection. Washing with soap and water is appropriate when the hands are visibly soiled or contaminated with blood or other body fluids, when exposure to potential spore-forming pathogens is strongly suspected or…

    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 · E2023-03-23 · 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 ensure food preparation knives ready for use were clean. This practice had the potential to affect food served to residents. Findings included: On 3/22/23 at 11:55 AM an observation of the kitchen revealed two food preparation knives ready for use in the knife storage rack contained visible dried debris on the sides of the blades. The cook was present when the observation was made. On 3/22/23 at 12:54 PM the Dietary Manager (DM) stated the knives were assigned to be cleaned by the cook after use and were placed in the knife rack by the cook. The DM said the knives should have been cleaned and stored without dried debris on them and were overlooked before storing them. The cook was interviewed on 3/22/23 at 1:13 PM and stated the cooks were responsible to wash, clean and sanitize the knives after use. He said the knives were checked for cleanliness before placing them into the storage rack for use. The cook said he believed the 2 knives were overlooked when they were cleaned. The Administrator stated on 3/23/23 at 2:14…

    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 · D2023-03-23 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — isolated
    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 observation and staff interviews the facility's Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) committee failed to maintain implemented procedures and monitor interventions that the committee had previously put into place following the facility's 6/10/21 recertification survey. The failure related to two deficiencies that were originally cited during the 6/10/21 recertification survey and was cited on the current recertification and complaint survey of 3/20/23. The recited deficiencies were in the areas of infection prevention and control and food safety requirements and store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. The continued failure of the facility during two surveys of record in the same area showed a pattern of the facility's inability to sustain an effective Quality Assurance program. The Findings included: This tag is cross referenced to: F-880 Based on observations, record review and staff interviews the facility failed to implement their policy for Infection Prevention when 1 of 1 staff (Nurse…

    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 before2023-03-23 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record reviews, and staff interviews, the facility failed to implement their policy for Infection Prevention when 1 of 1 staff (Nurse Aide #1) failed to put on gloves and a gown before entering a resident's room for 1 of 2 residents on contact precautions (Resident #6). The findings included: The facility's policy entitled, Infection Prevention .Contact, Contact Enteric . read in part, Isolation precautions will be used .when standard precautions alone are not adequate to eliminate or minimize occupational exposure to communicable disease .contact precautions are indicated for patients who are known or suspected to be infected with microorganisms that can be transmitted by direct contact with the patient or indirect contact with environmental surfaces .personal protective equipment (PPE) including gloves and gown are worn to enter a patient's room. Perform hand hygiene with soap and water when leaving room. Resident #6 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with current diagnoses 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to ATRIUM HEALTH — 5 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 53.2-0.2 vs chain
Health inspection 3 of 53.4-0.4 vs chain
Staffing 2 of 52.0≈ chain avg
Quality measures 4 of 53.6+0.4 vs chain
The other 4 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.2★, 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 / managerTypeRoleSince
BALL, RODNEYIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE OFFICER; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 02/01/2023
HAYNES, KENNETHIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE OFFICER; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 06/21/2019
RISSMILLER, SCOTTIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; TRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 06/21/2019
ADVOCATE HEALTH INCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/29/2025
ATRIUM HEALTH INCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/29/2025
BROAD RIVER REHABILITATIONOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/01/2023
OPTIMED HOSPITALISTSOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/29/2025
PRO DIVERSITY PARTNERS, LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/29/2025
THE CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG HOSPITAL AUTHORITYOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 02/01/2020
DOTSON, KATHRYNIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/01/2020
MURRAY, ROBERTIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/16/2024

CMS files one row per role, so the 23 rows in the source record cover these 11 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

6 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.

$8.8M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-54.8%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$2.6M
Related-party expense19% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 69%Medicare 5%Other / private 26%

This home reported $2.6M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 19% 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. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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

$415per resident / day
operating cost
$12,625per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$268per 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 345282. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-11-18, 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