Davis Health and Wellness Center at Cambridge Vill
83 Cavalier Drive STE 200, Wilmington, NC 28405 · Non profit - Corporation · 20 certified beds · (910) 679-8300 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high number of inspection citations overall (15) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (70%) runs well above the national median (45%)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 4 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 2 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 0.0% | 3.5% | 3.3% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.3% | 1.4% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 89.7% | 78.1% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 18.2% | 22.9% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 17.1% | 12.9% | 12.0% | worse |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ 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.
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.
74.7% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 205 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 29.2% 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 106 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 0.92 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 96% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 16% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 74.7%CMS range 70.3–78.8 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.9%CMS range 6.8–12.6 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 29.2% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 33.0% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 24.5% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 95.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 97.2% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 discharge | 96.2% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 stay | 0.8% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 5.5%CMS range 2.5–11.4 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.59 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 20 beds and averages 16.6 residents a day — about 83% occupied, or roughly 3 beds typically open. It usually has some room. 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 4.24 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.53 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.32 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 3.90 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.39 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.68 to 1.15 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 70% is well above the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are 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.
15 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 5 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2026-03-26 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — widespreadHave a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record reviews and staff interviews, the facility failed to schedule a Registered Nurse (RN) for at least eight consecutive hours per day seven days a week for 9 of 172 days reviewed for sufficient staffing (4/12/25, 4/25/25, 4/26/25, 5/9/25, 6/7/25, 6/8/25, 8/2/25, 8/3/25 and 9/21/25).Finding included:The Payroll Based Journal (PBJ) report for the Federal Fiscal third quarter of 2025 (April, May, June) and the Federal Fiscal fourth quarter of 2025 (July, August, September) reported the facility was without RN coverage for eight consecutive hours per day.A review of the daily census posting sheets for the months of 4/12/25 to 9/30/25, indicated a consistent census less than 60 residents in the facility and no RN coverage for eight consecutive hours for the following dates: 4/12/25, 4/25/25, 4/26/25, 5/9/25, 6/7/25, 6/8/25, 8/2/25, 8/3/25, 9/21/25. A review of the daily nursing staffing sheets for the months of 4/1/25 to 9/30/25 indicated there was no RN scheduled for at least eight consecutive hours for the following dates: 4/12/25, 4/25/25, 4/26/25, 5/9/25, 6/7/25, 6/8/25,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-03-26 · tag F0552 — patternEnsure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
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 Physician interviews the facility failed to obtain consent and inform the resident or Responsible Party in advance of the risks and benefits of psychotropic medications (medications that alter brain chemicals and are used to treat conditions such as anxiety and depression and include the medications classified as antidepressants) prior to initiation for 7 of 7 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications (Residents #13, #4, #16,#1,#26, #12, #3). Findings included: a). Resident #13 was admitted on [DATE] with a diagnosis of depression. Review of Resident #13's physician orders revealed an order dated 2/13/26 for the antidepressant medication duloxetine delayed release 30 milligrams (mg) twice per day for depression. A review of Resident #13's electronic medical record (EMR) indicated no documentation that the resident or resident representative was informed in advance of the risks or benefits of initiating the psychotropic antidepressant medication duloxetine prescribed for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-03-26 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations and staff interviews, the facility failed to discard expired food items stored in 1 of 2 reach in refrigerators. This deficient practice had the potential to affect the safety of food served to residents. Findings included: During the initial tour of the Kitchen on 03/22/26 at 10:20 AM along with [NAME] #1 the following expired food items were observed in the reach-in refrigerator: - A plastic container of sauerkraut that was opened with a discard date of 2/24/26.- A plastic container of canned pears that was opened with a discard date of 3/12/26.- A plastic container of canned tuna that was opened with a discard date of 3/19/26.- A plastic container of canned pork and beans that was opened with a discard date of 3/21/26. During an interview on 3/22/26 at 10:25 AM [NAME] #1 stated all kitchen staff were responsible for checking for and discarding expired foods. He stated he was the weekend cook and had not gone through the refrigerator this morning (3/22/26) to check it. He stated he also worked yesterday (3/21/26) and the expired food items were overlooked.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-26 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff and Physician interviews, the facility failed to notify the Physician when Resident #13 missed 8 doses of the antibiotic doxycycline for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for notification (Resident #13). Findings included: Resident #13 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnosis which included chronic osteomyelitis (bone infection) and diabetes. Review of a physician order dated 2/13/26 indicated Resident #13 was ordered doxycycline 100 milligrams (mg) by mouth twice per day indefinitely for chronic osteomyelitis. Review of Resident #13's Medication Administration Record (MAR) for March 2026 revealed the following documentation for the medication doxycycline 100 mg twice a day. On 3/9/26 the lunch dose was documented by Nurse #6 as the medication was unavailable and the medication was not administered. On 3/9/26 PM (evening) dose was documented by Nurse #1 as the medication was unavailable and the medication was not administered. There was no documentation in the nursing progress notes that the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-26 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide 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 review and interviews with staff, the Pharmacy Manager and the Physician, the facility failed to obtain the antibiotic doxycycline, which was prescribed for Resident #13 twice daily for the treatment of chronic osteomyelitis (a bone infection). As a result, Resident #13 missed a total of eight doses of the medication on 3/9/26, 3/10/26, 3/11/26, and 3/12/26. According to the Physician, the resident did not experience an adverse outcome; however, the failure to provide the prescribed antibiotic placed the resident at risk for potential complications. This occurred for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for pharmacy services.Findings included:Resident #13 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnosis which included chronic osteomyelitis and diabetes. Review of a physician order dated 2/13/26 indicated Resident #13 was ordered doxycycline 100 milligrams (mg) by mouth twice per day indefinitely for chronic osteomyelitis.Review of Resident #13's Medication Administration Record (MAR) for March 2026 revealed the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-26 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
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 act on the Consultant Pharmacist's monthly medication regimen review and change the frequency of Resident #8's hydroxyzine 25 milligrams (an antihistamine used to treat anxiety, allergic reactions, and induce sleep) from three times a day to twice a day after the physician signed to change the medication order. This occurred for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for medication administration (Resident #8). Findings included: Resident #8 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including pruritus (persistent itching). A physician's order dated 7/10/23 for Resident #8 revealed hydroxyzine 25 milligram tablets three times a day for pruritus. The Consultant's Pharmacist's Medication Regimen Review dated 1/12/26 noted that the Physician signed the pharmacy consult report on 12/12/25 to change Resident #8's hydroxyzine to 25 milligrams every morning and midday and discontinue three times a day. This order was not changed in the electronic medical…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-26 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure 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, and residents, staff, Physician and Pharmacy Manager interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from significant medication errors when 1.) Eight doses of the antibiotic doxycycline, prescribed twice daily for the treatment of chronic osteomyelitis (bone infection), were omitted on 3/9/26, 3/10/26, 3/11/26 and 3/12/26 for Resident #13. 2.) Resident #5 received 15 milligrams (mg) of mirtazapine (a psychotropic medication primarily prescribed for depression) instead of the physician ordered 7.5 mg dose. 3.) Resident #8 continued to receive hydroxyzine 25 mg (an antihistamine that directly affects the central nervous system and used to treat anxiety, allergic reactions, and induce sleep) three times a day instead of the reduced dose of twice a day. The residents did not experience any significant outcome, however this failure placed Resident #13 at risk for potential complications, and the potential for altered sedation levels, and an increased risk of adverse effects for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-11-17 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop 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 record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to develop a person-centered care plan in the area of falls for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for falls (Resident #1 and Resident #2).The findings included:1. Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included a left knee fracture.The Minimum Data Set (MDS) admission assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #1 was cognitively intact and required partial to moderate assistance for transfers. Resident #1 was coded for a fall with fracture prior to admission and one fall without injury since admission to the facility. The MDS admission assessment further noted the care area assessment (a standardized assessment tool to identify potential problems and need in specific areas, such as falls, used to develop individualized care plans) for falls was triggered for a care plan to be initiated.Review of Resident #1's care plan initiated on 9/01/25 and last revised on 9/16/25 revealed no care plan was in place for fall risk.The…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2025-01-24 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — widespreadImplement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to implement a facility-wide system to monitor the use of antibiotics. This was evident for 12 of 12 months (January 2024, February 2024, March 2024, April 2024, May 2024, June 2024, July 2024, August 2024, September 2024, October 2024, November 2024, December 2024) that surveillance data was reviewed. This practice had the potential to affect 18 of 18 residents in the facility. Findings included: The facility's Antibiotic Stewardship Program policy last revised on February 27, 2023, documented the antibiotic stewardship program will review essential data including antibiotic orders, clinical documentation, infection surveillance logs, microbiology testing, other tests to confirm infections, and trends in infection. A review of the monthly antibiotic summary reports for January 2024 through December 2024 revealed that no information for antibiotic monitoring was included. The monthly reports indicated the number of each type of infection including urinary tract infection, pneumonia, central line associated blood…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2023-11-30 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — widespreadHave a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to schedule a Registered Nurse (RN) for at least 8 consecutive hours per day, 7 days a week for 17 of 332 days reviewed for sufficient staffing 8/27/22, 9/17/22, 9/18/22, 10/30/22, 12/10/22, 12/24/22, 12/25/22, 2/19/23, 3/4/23, 4/1/23, 4/2/23, 4/15/23, 4/16/23, 5/27/23, 5/28/23, 6/10/23, and 6/24/23. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all facility residents. The findings included: The Payroll Based Journal (PBJ) data report for fiscal year 2022 Quarter 4 from August 1 to September 30, 2022, was reviewed. The report indicated that the facility had 3 days within the quarter with no registered nurse (RN) hours. The dates were 8/27/22, 9/17/22, and 9/18/22. Review of the facility's nursing schedule revealed no RN was scheduled to work on 8/27/22, 9/17/22, and 9/18/22. The time sheets revealed no RN, including the Director of Nursing (DON), had worked any shift on 8/27/22, 9/17/22, and 9/18/22. The PBJ data report for fiscal year 2023 Quarter 1 from October 1 to December 31, 2022, was reviewed. The report…
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.
Show the remaining 5 citations
- Potential for harm · F2023-11-30 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to have a documented water management program and failed to develop a program to assess/identify where legionella and other opportunistic waterborne pathogens could grow and spread, and measures to prevent the growth of opportunistic waterborne pathogens and how to monitor them that could affect 9 of 9 residents. The findings included: Review of the facility's Emergency Preparedness Plan (effective 11/29/23) and Infection Prevention and Control Program Policy dated 02/27/23; revealed no information related to a facility water safety management program. An interview was conducted on 11/29/23 at 11:30 AM with the Maintenance Technician. He said a water safety management program was not in place to monitor legionella or other waterborne pathogens, and that they needed to develop a program. An interview was conducted on 11/29/23 at 1:15 PM with the Administrator. She stated she was unaware of the requirement to develop a water management program. She stated that she spoke with the facility Maintenance Technician, and he…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-11-30 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — patternProvide 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 observation, record review and staff interview the facility failed to provide a nutritional supplement ordered by the physician for 1 of 9 sampled residents (Resident #10) reviewed for nutrition. The Findings included: Resident #10 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses of protein malnutrition, chronic kidney disease, and dysphagia. A review of Resident #10's diet orders dated 11/03/23 revealed the resident to receive a fortified nutritional supplement 237 milliliters (ml) once a day in the morning, with a start date of 11/03/23. A review of Resident #10's November/2023 Medication Administration Record (MAR) was conducted on 11/30/23. The MAR revealed from 11/04/23 through 11/30/23 nurses checked off the morning fortified nutritional supplement was given to the resident. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #10 had a memory problem and was severely impaired in cognitive skills for daily decision making. Resident #10 needed set up help and supervision for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-11-30 · tag F0554 — isolatedAllow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and resident, staff, and Physician interviews the facility failed to assess a resident's ability to self-administer medications. This deficient practice occurred for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #3) reviewed for medication self-administration. Findings included: Resident #3 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include hypertension and major depressive disorder, recurrent, moderate. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment 10/27/2023 for Resident #3 revealed she was cognitively intact and required extensive assistance of 1 staff for activities of daily living (ADL) care. The Care Plan for Resident #3 last reviewed on 11/16/2023, revealed a plan of care with a start date of 5/16/2023 which read in part, She has history of pocketing medications and then reporting that nurse didn't give to her, and reporting being given prn medications without asking for them. Interventions included administering medications as ordered and to document refusals. There 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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-11-30 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
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 maintain an accurate Medication Administration Record (MAR) for the administration of fortified nutritional supplement for 1 of 1 resident reviewed (Resident #10). The Findings included: Resident #10 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #10 had a memory problem and was severely impaired in cognitive skills for daily decision making. A review of Resident #10's diet orders dated 11/03/23 revealed the resident to receive a fortified nutritional supplement 237 milliliters (ml) once a day in the morning, with a start date of 11/03/23. A review of Resident #10's November/2023 Medication Administration Record (MAR) was conducted on 11/30/23. The MAR revealed from 11/04/23 through 11/30/23 nurses checked off the morning fortified nutritional supplement was given to the resident. An interview was conducted on 11/27/23 at 1:10 PM with Resident #10 and visitor #1. The resident was in her…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-11-30 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — isolatedSet 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 record review and staff interviews, the facility's Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) committee failed to maintain implemented procedures and monitor interventions that the committee previously put in place. This was for one repeat deficiency in the area of Resident Records (F842) originally cited on 3/26/2021 during the recertification and complaint investigation survey and subsequently recited on 11/30/2023 during the recertification and complaint survey. The continued failure of the facility during two federal surveys of record shows a pattern of the facility's inability to sustain an effective QAA. Findings included: This tag cross referenced to: F842 Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to maintain an accurate Medication Administration Record (MAR) for the administration of fortified nutritional supplement for 1 of 1 resident reviewed (Resident #10). During the recertification and complaint investigation survey of 3/26/2021, the facility failed to provide consistent information regarding a resident's code status. An interview was completed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| LONG, CHARLES | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/06/2015 |
| CORNELIA NIXON DAVIS, INC. | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/06/2015 |
| UNIDINE CORPORATION | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/01/2023 |
| BIEHL, JOANNA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 12/23/2024 |
| CAQUIAS GONZALEZ, EILEEN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 07/01/2008 |
| CLEMENTS, MARY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 08/16/2024 |
| MCADAMS WELSH, MELISSA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 08/13/2024 |
| FORVIS MAZARS LLP | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 16 rows in the source record cover these 8 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.
3 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.
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.
What families pay in NC
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the North Carolina Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 345568. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-03-26, 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.