Warren Hills Nursing Center

Location & what’s nearby

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

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

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

31.9% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that worse than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 79 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 59.5% 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 37 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 0.17 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 15% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 10% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 140 beds and averages 86.3 residents a day — about 62% occupied, or roughly 54 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. 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 3.55 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.37 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.24 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 3.19 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.70 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.41 to 0.29 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 56% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

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 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.

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.

17 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 7 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · E2026-02-26 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — pattern
  Ensure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary 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 Based on observation, record review, and interviews with staff, the Consultant Pharmacist, and the Physician Assistant, the facility failed to evaluate the continued need for a medication prescribed for wheezing. This deficient practice had the potential to result in residents receiving medications without clinical indication, ongoing monitoring, or justification of continued use for 1 of 6 residents reviewed unnecessary medications (Resident #75).The findings included:Resident #75 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included dementia without behavioral disturbances, pleural effusion (abnormal accumulation of excess fluid in the space between the lungs and chest wall), and congestive heart failure (CHF). The nursing progress note dated 11/20/25 at 8:03 pm revealed the Physician Assistant (PA) was notified by Nurse #2 that Resident #75 had a wheeze (a high-pitched, whistling sound produced during breathing caused by narrowed or obstructed airways). Nurse #2 noted that the PA ordered 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.

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2026-02-26 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, record review and staff interviews the facility failed to implement their infection prevention program policies and procedures and follow their Hand Hygiene policy when Nurse #3 failed to perform hand hygiene and change gloves when flushing a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) line (a long thin flexible tube inserted through an arm vein near the heart for long term intravenous access) and connecting the intravenous (IV) antibiotic tubing to the PICC line tubing. In addition, the Wound Treatment Nurse failed to change the disposable gloves and perform hand hygiene during wound care observation for Resident #2 and Resident #22. The deficient practice occurred for 2 of 4 staff observed for infection control practices (Nurse #3 and Wound Nurse).The findings included: The facility's Infection Prevention and Control Standards policy, last approved September 2025, revealed the purpose of the policy was to implement the Infection Prevention and Control Program (IPCP) to minimize the risk of infection to the residents and staff. The policy further read that…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-02-26 · tag F0641 — isolated
  Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to accurately code the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessments for 3 of 29 residents whose MDS assessments were reviewed for accuracy (Resident #2, Resident #28 and Resident #38).The findings included: 1. Resident #2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included dementia with behaviors. The wound provider visit note dated 1/16/26 revealed Resident #2 was treated for a stage 4 pressure ulcer to the sacrum, a stage 3 pressure ulcer to the left buttock, and an unstageable deep tissue injury (DTI) to the right heel. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) quarterly assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #2 was coded for one stage 3 pressure ulcer and one unstageable deep tissue injury (DTI). An interview was conducted with the MDS Nurse on 2/25/26 at 3:38 pm who confirmed Resident #2 had a stage 3 pressure ulcer, a stage 4 pressure ulcer, and a DTI at the time of the MDS quarterly assessment based on the documentation from the wound provider.…

  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 · D2026-02-26 · 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 and staff interviews, the facility failed to place a resting hand orthosis ([NAME], a device designed to support the hand, wrist, and fingers in a functional position) to the right hand for contracture management for 1 of 3 resident reviewed for position, mobility and range of motion (Resident #6).The findings included:Resident #6 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included stroke with hemiparesis (weakness caused by stroke) affecting the right dominant side. The care plan initiated on 11/19/25 and under review on 2/23/26 revealed Resident #6 had right hemiplegia/hemiparesis related to stroke with interventions which included perform range and motion exercises with am and pm care daily, apply [NAME] daily, complete hand hygiene and skin checks. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) admission assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #6 had severe cognitive impairment and was coded for functional limitation in range of motion on the upper and lower extremity on…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-02-26 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
  Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to secure the indwelling urinary catheter tubing to prevent tugging or pulling for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for indwelling urinary catheter (Resident #22).Resident #22 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included neuromuscular dysfunction of bladder and urinary retention. A physician's order dated 9/5/2025 indicated Resident #11 had an indwelling urinary catheter for urinary retention.The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #22 was cognitively intact. He was coded as having an indwelling urinary catheter.An observation was conducted of wound care on 02/24/2026 at 2:17 PM with the Wound Nurse. During the observation Resident #22 did not have a leg band in place to secure the tubing for his indwelling urinary catheter. There was no tension on the catheter tubing during the observation. An interview was conducted with Resident #22 on 2/24/26 at 2:22 PM. 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-26 · 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 observation, record review and staff and resident interviews, the facility failed to obtain a physician order for supplemental oxygen for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for respiratory care (Resident #28). The findings included:Resident # 28 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included cellulitis of the right lower leg and pneumonia. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) admission assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #28 was cognitively intact and was not coded for supplemental oxygen therapy. The nursing progress note dated 2/14/26 at 11:27 am by Nurse #3 revealed Resident #28 complained of shortness of breath. Resident #28 was noted to have an oxygen saturation in the 80's (normal range of oxygen saturation is 95-100%) on room air. Nurse #3 placed 2 liters of supplemental oxygen via nasal cannula on Resident #28 and the oxygen saturation increased to 94 to 96%. Nurse #3 further noted that the provider was notified via electronic communication. An interview was conducted with Nurse #3 on…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-26 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
  Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review, observations, and staff interviews the facility failed to date open medications for 1 of 3 medication carts reviewed for medication storage (Hall 100 medication cart). The findings included:During an observation of Hall 100 medication cart with Nurse #1 on 2/24/26 at 3:15 pm the following was observed: - one plastic squeeze bottle of brimonidine/timolol solution 0.2/0.5% eye drops (a medication used to treat eye conditions like glaucoma) was observed open with no open date noted. The manufacturer's recommendation for the brimonidine/timolol solution 0.2/0.5% was to be used or discarded within 4 weeks of opening.- one plastic squeeze bottle of olopatadine solution 0.2% eye drops (an antihistamine eye drop used for relief of allergic conjunctivitis) open with no open date noted. The manufacturer's recommendation for the olopatadine solution 0.2% eye drops was to be used or discarded within 4 weeks of opening, even if the bottle was not empty.Nurse #1 was interviewed on 2/24/26 at 3:19 pm who revealed the medications were to be dated when initially opened. 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.

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-11-21 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — pattern
  Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, resident, and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide written documentation for advance directive information and the opportunity to formulate an advance directive for 13 of 22 residents reviewed for advanced directives. Residents #57, #71, #58, #55, #70, #68, #29, #72, #38, #52, #65, #61, #45. The findings included: a. Resident #57 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #57 had severe cognitive impairment. Review of a physician ' s order dated 7/24/24 revealed Resident #57 was a full code. There was no documentation in the medical record for education regarding formulation of an advance directive or documentation that an opportunity to formulate an advance directive was offered to the resident or their responsible party. b. Resident #71 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #57 was cognitively intact. Resident #71 held a physician order for full code. There was no documentation in the medical record for education regarding formulation of an advance directive…

  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 · D2024-11-21 · tag F0559 — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to share a room with spouse or roommate of choice and receive written notice before a change is made.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff and resident interviews, the facility failed to provide written notification of a roommate change for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for notification of a change (Resident #37). The findings included: Resident # 37 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #37 was cognitively intact. An interview was completed on 11/18/24 at 10:00 a.m. with Resident #37. Resident #37 stated approximately 2 to 3 weeks ago she received a new roommate. Resident #37 stated prior to that day she was in a room alone. The Resident stated she went out to an appointment and when she returned, she had a new roommate. Resident #37 stated she had not received written or verbal notification she would be getting a new roommate. Review of facility records revealed Resident #37 received a new roommate on 10/29/24. There was no documentation in the medical record for Resident #37 indicating a discussion or notification of a new roommate 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-11-21 · 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 refer a resident with a serious mental illness for a Level II Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for PASRR (Resident #34). Findings included: Resident #34 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. On 8/7/2023 Resident #34 was diagnosed with delusional disorder. A Level I PASRR determination notification letter dated 3/3/2020 indicated No further PASRR screening is required unless a significant change occurs with the individual's status which suggest a diagnosis of mental illness or mental retardation or, if present, suggests a change in treatment needs for those conditions. No facility documentation was discovered indicating a Level II PASRR referral had been completed for Resident #34 after the diagnosis of a serious mental illness had been made. An interview with the Social Worker (SW) on 11/20/2024 at 2:50 p.m. revealed she was not aware Resident #34's Level II PASRR…

  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

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to LIBERTY SENIOR LIVING — 37 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

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

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 27 rows in the source record cover these 19 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.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

This home reported $2.4M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 24% 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