Northchase Nursing and Rehabilitation 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.

57.2% 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 196 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 75.9% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 112 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 0.53 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 83% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 13% 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 128.4 residents a day — about 92% occupied, or roughly 12 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.49 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.76 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.80 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 3.61 on weekdays — 12% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.82 to 0.60 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 40% 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 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.

27 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 16 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · G2024-01-03 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and staff and resident interviews, the facility failed to provide a safe transfer when a resident (Resident #1) fell from a mechanical lift while being transferred by Nurse Aide #1 and Nurse Aide #2 and sustained a 10-centimeter laceration to the right ankle requiring 9 sutures, a contusion to the left wrist and left shoulder, and pain as a result of the fall for 1 of 3 residents observed for falls. Findings included: Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #1 had a diagnoses of congestive heart failure and hypoxia. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) quarterly assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #1 was cognitively intact and demonstrated no behaviors. Resident #1 required total dependence with two person physical assistance with transfers and did not receive anticoagulant (blood thinner) medication. Resident #1's weight was recorded as 199 pounds. A review of Resident #1's care plan dated 09/21/23 revealed Resident #1 had a plan of care for activities of…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-06-23 · 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 discard expired medications on 2 of 4 medication (med) carts observed (200 hall and 100 hall med carts) and date medications when they were opened to allow for the determination of their shortened expiration date for medications stored on 3 of 4 med carts (100 hall, 200 hall, and 400 hall) med carts reviewed for medication storage. Findings included: 1 a. An observation was conducted on 6/11/25 at 9:46 AM of the 200 hall med cart in the presence of Nurse #8. The observation revealed the following medications were stored on the cart. - An opened box of ipratropium bromide 0.5 milligrams (mg) and albuterol sulfate 3 mg (inhaled medications used to treat chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) nebulizer treatments containing 3 vials dispensed for Resident #23 with an opened date 2/6/25. The manufacturer's instructions included discarding medication 2 weeks after it was opened. - An open bottle of floor stock zinc sulfate (a supplement) 50 mg tablets with a manufacturer's expiration date of 1/25. - An opened box of…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-06-23 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review, observations and staff interviews, the facility failed to remove expired food items stored for use in 1 of 1 walk-in refrigerator and 1 of 2 nourishment rooms and failed to label and date leftover food in 1 of 2 nourishment rooms observed (Rehabilitation Hall nourishment room). This deficient practice had the potential to affect the food served to the residents. The findings included: 1. An observation in the kitchen on 6/9/25 at 11:00 AM revealed the following items in the walk-in refrigerator: - an opened bag of Swiss cheese with no opened date. - a metal container with pureed mixed fruit with no label and no opened date. - a metal container with stewed tomatoes with an opened date of 5/28/25 and a use by date of 5/29/25. - a metal container with pimentos with a label with an open date of 6/4/25. - an opened plastic bag of deli turkey with no opened date. - an opened plastic bag of deli ham with no opened date. - an opened half full box of muffins with no opened date. - an opened carton of honey thick tea with no opened date. - an opened carton of honey…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-06-23 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
  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 family interviews, the facility failed to honor a resident's choice to receive a shower for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for choices (Resident #172). Findings included: Resident #172 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included vascular dementia, anxiety, depression, and insomnia. The Minimum Data Set admission assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #172 was moderately cognitively impaired and demonstrated no behaviors or refusals of care. She required substantial / maximal assistance with one staff physical assistance with bed mobility and transfers, and substantial / maximal assistance with one staff physical assistance with personal hygiene. She had no functional impairments with range of motion, used a walker and a wheelchair and required one staff physical assistance with bathing/showering. Resident #172 was frequently incontinent of bowel and bladder. A review of Resident #172's care plan dated 06/04/25 revealed a plan of care for Activities of Daily…

  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 · D2025-06-23 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
  Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, and staff, Nurse Practitioner (NP), Medical Director interviews, and Consultant Pharmacist interviews, the facility failed to protect a resident's right to be free from neglect, when a nurse (Nurse #1) disregarded a severe drug-to drug interaction alert sent from the pharmacy to the resident's electronic medical record (EMR), regarding a newly prescribed antibiotic and a heart medication the resident (Resident #30) was currently prescribed. Nurse #1 neglected to read a severe drug-to-drug interaction alert received from the pharmacy regarding a newly prescribed antibiotic and did not notify the physician of the alert. The resident was administered the antibiotic by the nurse and there was no significant harm to the resident. This deficient practice occurred for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for neglect. The findings included: Resident #30 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including congestive heart failure (CHF), obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), lymphedema, kidney…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-06-23 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolated
  Protect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews with staff, Consultant Pharmacist, and Pharmacy Manager, the facility failed to prevent misappropriation of a resident's controlled medication (30 hydrocodone/acetaminophen 5-325 milligrams (mg) pills and 30 oxycodone hydrochloride 10 mg pills) prescribed by the physician for pain for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for misappropriation of property (Resident #267). Findings included: Resident #267 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include dementia, unspecified severity, without behavioral disturbance, psychotic disturbance, and mood disturbance, history of falls, atrial fibrillation. She was receiving hospice care at the time of the misappropriation. The physician's orders for Resident #267 included: - Hydrocodone/Acetaminophen 5-325 mg oral tablet every 8 hours for pain ordered on [DATE]. - Oxycodone hydrochloride oral tablet 10 mg. Give 10 mg by mouth every 6 hours as needed (PRN) for pain ordered on [DATE]. The pharmacy packing slips for Resident #267's…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-23 · 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 in the area of Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) for 2 of 26 residents reviewed for MDS assessments (Resident #14 and #16). Findings included: 1. Resident #14 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included anxiety, depression, and bipolar disorder. Review of Resident #14's electronic health record revealed Resident's PASARR was completed on 02/12/21 and indicated Resident #14 was screened as Level II (a person centered evaluation that is completed for residents identified as having a mental illness diagnoses. It helps to determine appropriate placement and the need of specialized services). A review of Resident #14's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #14 was not coded as a Level II PASRR. A review of Resident #14's care plan dated 05/29/25 revealed a plan of care for a Level II Preadmission Screening and Resident Review…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-06-23 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolated
  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 record review and staff and Nurse Practitioner (NP), and Consultant Pharmacist interviews, the facility failed to prevent the administration of unnecessary medication when a resident (Resident #30) a) received a dose of ceftriaxone (an antibiotic used to treat bacterial infections) as a one-time dose by intramuscular injection. Resident #30 had a documented allergy to ceftriaxone documented on the allergy list in the electronic medical record (EMR) and b) administered azithromycin ( an antibiotic used to treat bacterial infections) that had a drug to drug interaction alert not to be administered with amiodarone without a baseline electrocardiogram (EKG is a test that measures the electrical impulses in the heart for abnormal rhythms because of risk of long QT syndrome (prolonged QT interval on the EKG (which increases the risk of a dangerous heart rhythm). This deficient practice occurred for 1 of 6 residents reviewed for medication errors. The findings included: a).The hospital discharge summary sent…

  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
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-23 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — isolated
  Ensure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to honor a resident's food preferences. This deficient practice was for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for food preferences (Resident #14). Findings included: Resident #14 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A physician order dated 02/12/21 revealed Resident #14 had an order to receive a regular diet, with regular texture, and thin consistency. A diet communication slip dated 05/15/25 revealed resident requests grits in the morning and no orange juice. This slip was signed by Nurse #11. Review of a nursing note written on 05/17/25 by Nurse #11, revealed Resident approached nurse and stated that she needed nurse to go to the kitchen and reiterate that she wants grits for breakfast every morning and no orange juice. This nurse let resident know that she wrote a dietary slip the other day, as resident requested, and handed it to the kitchen staff herself. Nurse will again let kitchen know the residents' request. The Minimum Data…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-05-17 · tag F0641 — pattern
  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 code the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments accurately in the area of nutrition for 4 of 11 residents whose MDS assessments were reviewed for nutrition (Residents #107, #12, #19, # 69). Findings included: 1. Resident #107 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnosis which included adult failure to thrive and diabetes. Review of Resident #107's electronic health record revealed the following weights were recorded: 10/2/2023- 207.3 pounds (Lbs.) 11/10/2023- 205.1 Lbs. 12/5/2023- 194.2 Lbs. 1/19/2024- 181.8 Lbs. 1/30/2024- 177.1 Lbs. 2/9/2024- 172.5 Lbs. 3/26/2024- 147.6 Lbs. 4/2/2024 1:14 PM- 152.3 Lbs. 4/10/2024 2:35 PM- 158.1 Lbs. Review of Resident #107's weights recorded revealed resident had a 47.1-pound weight loss in180 days (22.92 percent). Review of Resident #107's 4/12/24 quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) indicated resident had a mild cognitive impairment. Resident #107's weight was 158 pounds and resident was coded as had no weight loss or…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-05-17 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — pattern
  Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
  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 update the comprehensive care plan to reflect changes in care interventions in the areas of mobility and nutrition. This was for 3 of 11 residents whose care plans were reviewed (Resident #107, Resident #12, and Resident #19). Findings included: 1.Resident #107 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnosis which included: stroke with hemiparesis, adult failure to thrive and diabetes. a. Review of Resident #107's nutrition care plan last revised on 1/31/2024 revealed a problem of state of nourishment more than body requirement characterized by weight gain, obesity, excessive appetite related to: increased caloric and fat intake, and sedentary lifestyle. The goal indicated the resident would adhere to a prescribed diet, would eat food only from their own plate, and would eliminate snacking between meals. The care plan did not include a goal of a desired weight to be achieved. Interventions included avoiding using food as a reward, using…

  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

$7,901 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $7,901 — penalty dated 2024-01-03

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to PRINCIPLE LONG TERM CARE — 40 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 11 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.

1 organizational owner 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 $3.5M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 20% 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