Ridge Valley Center for Nursing and Rehabilitation

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.

26.0% 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 54 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 57.5% 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 40 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 0.20 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 22% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 42% 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 120 beds and averages 83.8 residents a day — about 70% occupied, or roughly 36 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 3.18 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.21 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.52 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.09 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.21 on weekdays — 4% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.23 to 0.15 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 34% is below 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 fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

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

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

25 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 13 are one tap away and print in full.

• Immediate jeopardy · J2023-06-20 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolated
  Ensure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, resident, staff, and Medical Director interview the facility failed to prevent a significant medication error for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for medication errors (Resident #31). Nurse #1 administered 38 units of insulin glargine (a long-acting insulin that lasts for 24 hours and does not have a peak onset of action) in error to Resident #31, a resident who did not have a diagnosis of diabetes. Resident #31's blood sugar dropped throughout the night and the resident was sent to the hospital due to a blood sugar level of 50 (normal range 90-100) requiring an overnight hospitalization. A serious set of symptoms of hypoglycemia can occur in people without diabetes including tremors, palpitations, anxiety, sweating, dizziness, weakness, increased risk for falls and fractures, drowsiness, confusion, altered mental status, loss of consciousness, or seizures. The symptoms occur when the glucose level falls below 55 mg/dL, although this can be variable. There was high likelihood for serious harm.…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
• Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2023-06-20 · 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 review and staff interviews, the facility failed to follow the manufacturer's guidelines for cleaning and disinfection of a blood glucose meter which was stored in the medication cart after use for 2 of 2 residents observed (Resident #3 and Resident #105) during a medication pass on 06/06/23 at 9:05 AM. The blood glucose meter was stored in the medication cart and was not designated as an individual resident meter. The facility had three residents in the building with a diagnosis of a bloodborne pathogen (microorganisms that cause disease and are present in human blood) (Resident #104, Resident #64 and Resident #76). This deficient practice had a high likelihood for transmitting bloodborne pathogens within the facility. Immediate Jeopardy began on 06/06/23 when Nurse #6 was observed during medication pass removing two glucometers from the medication cart and use them without disinfecting per manufacturer's guidelines. The immediate jeopardy is present and ongoing. Findings included: Review of the facility policy Glucometer Disinfection revised in October…

  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 · Ecited before2025-12-04 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
  Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations and staff interviews, the facility failed to remove 2 expired Bisacodyl suppositories, 10 expired omeprazole tablets in accordance with the manufacturer's expiration date, and 27 unidentifiable loose pills from the medication carts. The facility also failed to date 2 opened insulin pens per manufacturer's specification for 4 of 4 medication carts (A, B, C and D) reviewed for medication storage.The findings included: Review of the package inserts for insulin Glargine revealed it could be stored under refrigeration at 36 to 46 Fahrenheit (F) unopened until the expiration date. Once the insulin pen was opened and in use, it could be kept at room temperatures below 86 F for up to 28 days. Discarded the insulin after 28 days even if it still had insulin in it. a.During a medication storage audit conducted on 12/02/25 at 4:34 PM in the presence of Certified Medication Aide (CMA) #1, two (2) Bisacodyl rectal suppositories 10 milligrams (mg) that expired on 10/31/25 were found in the medication cart for A Hall and available for use. An interview was conducted with CMA…

  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 · Dcited before2025-07-17 · 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 observations, record reviews and staff interviews, the facility failed to identify the need for Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) for Resident #2 with an unhealed surgical wound and failed to implement their infection control policy when Nurse #2 did not apply a gown when performing wound care for Resident #2. In addition, Nurse #2 failed to change gloves and perform hand hygiene after cleansing wounds and applying the ordered dressing on Resident #2 and Resident #3. This occurred for 1 of 1 staff member observed for infection control practices. The findings included:Review of the facility's Enhanced Barrier Precautions policy dated 2025 revealed: It is the policy of this facility to implement enhanced barrier precautions for the prevention of transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms. 2. Initiation of EBP: b. An order for enhanced barrier precautions will be obtained for residents for unhealed surgical wounds.Review of the facility's Hand Hygiene policy dated 2025 revealed: All staff will perform proper hand hygiene procedures to prevent the spread of infection to…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-08 · 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to secure an opened tube and an opened container of topical ointment for 1 of 1 Resident reviewed for medication storage. (Resident #3). The findings included: Resident #3 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] coded Resident #3 with an intact cognition. During an observation conducted on 01/08/25 at 10:53 AM, an opened tube containing approximately 1.5 ounces of zinc oxide ointment 20 % (a topical ointment for treating or preventing skin irritation related to diaper rash) was found unattended on top of the over-bed table in Resident #3's room. A further observation revealed another opened container of zinc oxide ointment with the same strength with approximately 3 ounces remaining in the container left unattended on top of Resident #3's bedside table. An interview was conducted with Resident #3 on 01/08/25 at 10:55 AM. She stated the ointments were for her diaper rash and 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.

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-09-11 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
  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 and resident interviews, the facility failed to treat a resident with respect and dignity when Nurse #3 told a resident (Resident #48) that he would not be sent out to the hospital after he yelled that he was uncomfortable and felt that no one was helping him. The facility also failed to treat a resident with respect and dignity when the facility failed to address unwanted facial hair on a resident (Resident #20) This was for 2 of 6 residents reviewed for treating residents with respect and dignity. The findings included: 1. Resident #48 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included anxiety disorder, paraplegia, and chronic pain syndrome. A review of Resident #48's quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #48 was cognitively intact with no delusions, behaviors, or rejection of care. During an interview with Resident #48 on 09/04/24 at 2:15 PM revealed he had been feeling bad on 08/21/24 with some pain in his upper back. 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-09-11 · 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, staff interview, and Nurse Practitioner (NP) interviews the facility failed to ensure a resident's code status election was accurate throughout the medical record (Resident #25) and failed to ensure an advanced directive form was signed by the Resident or Responsible Party (RP) (Resident #60) for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for advanced directives (Resident #25 and Resident #60). The findings included: 1) Resident #25 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A review of a physician's order dated [DATE] revealed Resident #25 was a Do Not Resuscitate (DNR). A review of a Medical Orders for Scope of Treatment form (MOST) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #25 wished to be a DNR with a limited scope of treatment. A review of a care plan dated [DATE] revealed Resident #25 had an advanced directive and chose to be a DNR with an intervention that included to honor Resident #25's choice to be a full code. A review of a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #25 was…

  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 · D2024-09-11 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolated
  Ensure that each resident is free from the use of physical restraints, unless needed for medical treatment.
  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 interview the facility failed to protect Resident #125 from being physically restrained by Nurse Aide #2 when Resident #125 had terminal agitation and was attempting to sit up in bed for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for employee to resident abuse. Nurse Aide #2 used her hand to push Resident #125's head back into the pillow in an attempt to keep him in the bed. The findings included: Resident #125 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and expired on [DATE]. Resident #125's diagnoses included malignant neoplasm of lung and skin, and anxiety. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed that Resident #125 was cognitively intact and required supervision with transfers. There was no behaviors or rejection of care noted during the assessment reference period. The MDS also revealed that Resident #125 had a prognosis of less than 6 months to live and received hospice care. Review of an initial allegation report dated [DATE] at 4:25 AM read, staff reported that Nurse Aide…

  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 · D2024-09-11 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record reviews, and staff and Nurse Practitioner (NP) interviews, the facility failed to develop and implement a person-centered care plan for a resident on one-on-one supervision for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for development and implementation of a comprehensive care plan (Resident # 51). The findings included: Resident #51 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included dementia, disorientation (a state of confusion), and hallucinations (seeing/hearing something that is not there). A review of an admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #51 was severely cognitively impaired, had no behaviors, and no rejections of care. A review of the care plan dated 7/31/2024 revealed Resident #51 was at risk for elopement and wandering related to impaired safety awareness with interventions which included application of a wander guard and to address wandering behaviors. There was no care plan intervention related to one-on-one supervision. An observation was…

  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 · D2024-09-11 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
  Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
  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 resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to trim a dependent female resident's facial hair for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #20) reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL). The finding included: Resident #20 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included heart failure, diabetes mellitus, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and respiratory failure. A review of Resident #20's care plan revised 06/19/23 revealed the Resident had a self-care ADL deficit related to decreased mobility and disease process. The goal to maintain her current level of function would be attained by utilizing interventions which included providing extensive assistance of one staff with personal hygiene (shaving). The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #20 was cognitively intact and required substantial to maximal assistance of one staff for personal hygiene which included shaving. There was no documentation on the MDS 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-09-11 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff, and Nurse Practitioner interviews the facility failed to assess Resident #125 before transferring him back to bed after he was found on the floor for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for falls. The findings included: Resident #125 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and expired on [DATE]. Resident #125's diagnoses included malignant neoplasm of lung and skin, and anxiety. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed that Resident #125 was cognitively intact and required supervision with transfers. There was no behaviors or rejection of care noted during the assessment reference period. There was also no history of falls in the 6 months prior to admission or since admission to the facility. The MDS also revealed that Resident #125 had a prognosis of less than 6 months to live and received hospice care. Review of an initial allegation report dated [DATE] at 4:25 AM read, staff reported that Nurse Aide (NA) #2 handled Resident #125 roughly during the provision of care. 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-09-11 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolated
  Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
  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, Registered Dietitian (RD), Nurse Practitioner (NP), and Medical Director (MD) interviews the facility failed to meet the recommended fluid needs for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #42) reviewed for nutrition. The findings included: Resident #42 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), required the use of a gastrostomy tube (artificial opening in the stomach used for tube feeding) and tracheostomy. A physician order dated 07/21/24 read; flush tube with 30-60 milliliters (ml) of water before/after meds twice a day (120-240 ml). Review of the Registered Dietician (RD) nutritional assessment dated [DATE] revealed that Resident #42 required 1982-2379 ml of fluid per day. A review of the RD recommendations dated 7/25/2024 revealed Resident #42 was recommended to have free water at 30 ml per hour which totaled 720 ml (additionally 1094 ml of water were noted from the tube feeding formula). A review of 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.

  Quality of Life and Care 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.

Who owns this facility

The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

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 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

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