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

PruittHealth- Blythewood

1075 Heather Green Drive, Columbia, SC 29229 · For profit - Corporation · 120 certified beds · (803) 419-9863 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (803) 419-9863 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citations — no harm found (F0609, F0610) — most recent Apr 2024
Insights

This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
  • about 31% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies

One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.

A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.

4/5
CMS overall
4 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 2 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Urgent care / clinic
10040 Two Notch Rd · (803) 788-1153 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
1120 Sparkleberry Ln Ext · (803) 680-4714 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
1069 Sparkleberry Lane Extension · (803) 699-5740 · Call to confirm hours
Park
1320 Clemson Rd · (803) 736-6070 · Typically dawn to dusk

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 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 improved from 3 to 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating4★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased2.2%11.9%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight5.8%6.3%5.4%typical
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.2%0.6%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection1.7%1.3%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.7%3.1%6.5%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury1.2%3.2%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened4.6%12.7%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication7.1%21.0%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine91.0%90.6%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers8.8%5.1%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control9.9%16.7%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table16.0%15.3%17.1%typical
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.9%1.5%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine83.8%78.0%79.4%typical
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission28.1%24.3%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit20.1%13.9%12.0%worse

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

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

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

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

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

67.8% 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 145 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

67.8%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
12.5%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
65.7%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.35U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.15hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.16hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.05hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 65.7% 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 67 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 0.35 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 60% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 11% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF67.8%CMS range 57.0–77.651.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF12.5%CMS range 9.7–17.510.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge65.7%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge53.7%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge52.2%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge98.2%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization6.9%CMS range 4.2–11.87.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.031.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

0.64
RN hours/ resident / day
0.80
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.92
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.36
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.44
RN hoursweekends
53.5%
Total nursing turnover
52.9%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 120 beds and averages 113.7 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 6 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 3.36 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.64 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.92 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.69 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.63 on weekdays — 26% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.72 to 0.44 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 54% is about the same as 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

2
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-09-19)
5
at the previous standard inspection (2024-10-04)

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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

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

  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-09-19 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    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 observation, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure commercially prepared hard-cooked eggs were not stored for use beyond their use-by-date. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all residents receiving meals from the dietary department. Findings included: Review of a facility policy titled, Label, Dating, and Storage, revised 11/11/2022, specified, 4. Food and beverage items will be discarded according to guidance from a government agency such as the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and Food and Drug Administration (FDA). During an initial tour of the facility's kitchen on 09/15/2025 at 9:17 AM, with the Dietary Manager present, the walk-in cooler was observed to contain a white, plastic food-grade bucket of commercially prepared, hard-cooked eggs. The front of the bucket included a 'Use By' date of 09/09/2025. During an interview on 09/15/2025 at 11:09 AM, the Dietary Manager stated that the kitchen staff were supposed to discard all food on their expiration or use-by-dates. During an interview on 09/19/2025 at…

    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 · D2025-09-19 · 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

    Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility document and policy review, the facility failed to ensure wound care orders were transcribed into the electronic medical record at the time of admission for 1 (Resident (R)134) of 3 residents reviewed for wound care. This resulted in one missed wound care treatment on 09/15/2025. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, admission Orders, dated 09/2002, specified 5. Once all admission orders have been verified and documented appropriately, they are to be transcribed by the admitting nurse on the appropriate documents in the record (i.e. [id est, that is] MAR [Medication Administration Record], TAR [Treatment Administration Record], etc. [et cetera, other similar things]). Review of an undated facility document titled Dressing a Wound specified Check the individual's medical record for the healthcare provider's order, including the: order for the dressing change, type of dressing, frequency of dressing change, location of wound, cleansing solution, and peri wound protectant. Review of a Resident Face Sheet…

    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 · Fcited before2024-10-04 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of facility policy, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure foods stored in the main cooler, dry storage, and the preparatory area were labeled, dated, and not expired. This failure could potentially affect all 116 residents in the facility, who consumed food from the kitchen. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Labeling, Dating, and Storage with a complete revision date of 11/11/22, states, 4. Food and beverage items will be discarded according to guidance from a government agency such as the USD and FDA. During an observation on 10/01/24 at 10:35 AM, the following food items were observed in the main cooler and verified by the Certified Dietary Manager (CDM): 5 bags, unopened - NET WT 5 LBS (pounds) per bag of [NAME] Farms Shredded Carrots with Use by date 09/20/24. 1 open bag of [NAME] Farms Shredded Carrots, wrapped in plastic wrap with no date or label. 1 bag Iceberg salad mix with an expiration date of 09/27/24. During an observation on 10/01/24 at…

    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 · D2024-10-04 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — isolated
    Provide activities to meet all resident's needs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of facility policy, record review and interview, the facility failed to provide Resident (R)106 ongoing activities designed to meet the resident's interests, hobbies, and cultural preferences to promote physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for activities. Findings include: Review of the undated facility policy titled, Activities Program, states, The Health Care center provides an ongoing program of Activities designed to meet the physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident while offering a rich array of activities to the residents of the center. The center shall offer a variety of recreational programs to suit the interest and physical/cognitive of the residents that choose to participate. The center shall provide recreational activities that provide stimulation, promote or enhance physical, mental, and or party as well as information obtained by an initial assessment. Review of R106's Face Sheet revealed R106 was admitted to the facility…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-04 · 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 observation, interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to offer Resident (R)59, R106, R2, and R79, [NAME] or ice in-between meals and failed to provide a minimum of 16 ounces of fluids on resident's lunch trays. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Hydration: Dietary Services with a revision date of 10/18/17, states, All patient/resident will be provided a minimum of 16 OZ of fluids on each meal tray unless contraindicated. Water pitchers are filled with ice/water at least, but not limited to, twice per day. Review of R59's Face Sheet revealed R59 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses including but not limited to: urinary tract infection, quadriplegia, neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder, and bacteremia. During an observation and interview on 10/02/24 at 11:01 AM, R59 was observed asking Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA)2 for water to drink. CNA2 did not address the resident and walked out of the room. R59 then presses his call light and states that CNA2…

    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 · D2024-10-04 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolated
    Ensure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
    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 review of facility policy, manufacturers instruction for use, observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate less than 5 percent. Specifically, the Humalog Kwikpen and Lantus Solostar Pen for Resident (R)44 was not properly primed prior to administration. The medication error rate was 7.14 percent for 2 of 28 opportunities for error. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Medication Administration: General Guidelines revised on 04/10/19 states, Medications are administered as prescribed, in accordance with good nursing principles and practices and only by persons legally authorized to do so. Personnel authorized to administer medications do so only after they have familiarized themselves with the medication. Review of the [NAME] Lilly and Company Humalog Kwikpen, revised on 07/2023, instructions for use states,Prime before each injection. Priming your Pen means removing the air from the Needle and Cartridge that may collect during normal use and ensures…

    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 · D2024-10-04 · 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 review of facility policy, observation, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure medications were secured and properly stored for 3 out of 21 residents, Resident (R)20, R23, R43. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Medication Storage in the Healthcare Centers dated 04/09/24 states, Medications and biologicals are stored safely, securely, and properly following manufacturer's recommendations or those the supplier. The medication supply is accessible only to licensed nursing personnel and pharmacy personnel . 2. Only licensed nurses and the pharmacy personnel are allowed to access to medications . Medication room, carts, and medication supplies are locked or attended by persons with authorized access. Review of the facility policy titled, Medication Administration: General Guidelines revised on 04/10/19 states, 1. Medications are prepared, administered, and recorded only by licensed nursing, medical, or pharmacy personnel. 2. Medications are administered in accordance with written…

    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 · D2024-04-16 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interviews, record review, and facility document and policy review, the facility failed to ensure an allegation of abuse was reported to the administrator of the facility and to the state survey agency within two hours for 1 (Resident (R)2) of 3 sampled residents reviewed for abuse. Specifically, on 02/14/2024, R2 reported to Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN)5 that Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA)7 was rough when providing care. LPN5 failed to notify the Administrator immediately; subsequently, the allegation was not reported to the State Agency until 02/15/2024 at 7:08 PM, the day after the incident occurred. Findings included: A review of the facility policy titled Reporting Patient Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation, Mistreatment, and Misappropriation of Property, revised on 07/29/2019, revealed, 1. Any allegation, suspicion, or identified occurrence is identified involving patient abuse, neglect, exploitation, mistreatment, and misappropriation of property, including injuries of an unknown source, should be immediately reported to the Administrator of the provider…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2022-09-21 · 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 policy review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to provide food storage in a safe and consistent manner. This had the potential to affect 107 of 114 residents who consumed food from the kitchen. Findings include: Review the of facility's policy titled, Food Ordering, Receiving, and Storage dated 08/03/17, indicated, Date all stock items with delivery date. During an observation and initial kitchen walk through with the Dietary Manager (DM) on 09/19/22 beginning at 9:00 AM, the following was observed: 1. In the dry storage area, there was a clear, opened container of peanut butter with no label indicating open date or use by date. DM stated that this item should have been labeled and dated. 2. In the dry storage area, there was a large, clear storage bin containing a bag of breadcrumbs and a bag of meal. Both had been opened and securely closed, but there were no labels on either bag indicating an open or use by date. DM stated that these items should have been labeled. 3. In the dry storage area, there were four large containers of thousand island dressing…

    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 · D2022-09-21 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
    Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
    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 review of the facility policy, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to thoroughly investigate potential abuse for 2 of 2 residents (Resident (R) 65 and R110) sampled for abuse in a total sample of 30 residents. A lack of investigation has the potential to place other dependent residents at risk for neglect/abuse. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Investigation of Patient Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation, Mistreatment, and Misappropriation of Property, revised October 2020 revealed, Interviews should be conducted of all individuals who have relevant information, utilizing open-ended questions. Written signed statements from any involved parties should be obtained (and notarized, if necessary). Statements should be gathered from the following individuals: the suspect; the person(s) making accusation(s); the patient(s) involved; reliable patients who may have witnessed the incident; and any other persons who may have information. During a screening interview on 09/19/22 at…

    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 before2022-09-21 · 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 review of facility policy, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to provide care and services to maintain nutritional status and prevent weight loss for 1 resident (R)413, of 30 sampled residents. Specifically, the facility failed to follow their policy to obtain an admission weight for R413. R413 had significant weight loss and new nutritional interventions were not implemented to prevent additional weight loss. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy Weight Monitoring Program dated 06/13/18 revealed It is the policy . for each patient/resident to be weighed once a month unless ordered by the physician or contraindicated by patient/resident's medical condition. The Weight Team will review patient/resident weights on a monthly basis to determine risk of weight loss or weight gain. In a phone interview with the Resident's Representative (RR) (Family Member (F) 413) on 09/21/22 at 4:15 PM, F413 stated that R413 went from 118 lbs from entry date of 07/11/22 to 98 lbs on discharge…

    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 · D2022-09-21 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — isolated
    Ensure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of 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 observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to follow the menu by failing to provide a substitution of equally nutritive value for 1 of 1 resident (R)38 reviewed for following menus in a total sample of 30 residents. Findings include: During an observation on 09/20/22 at 12:54 PM, R38 was observed being assisted to eat his lunch meal. During this observation, R38's lunch meal tray included cabbage, stewed tomatoes, rice, cornbread, and sweet tea. Review of R38's lunch meal ticket dated 09/20/22 included the following items: veggie burger, scalloped potatoes, sauteed cabbage, cornbread, sweet tea, canned fruit, fortified juice, and cranberry juice. During an observation on 09/20/22 at 6:06 PM, R38 was observed eating dinner. During this observation, R38's dinner meal tray included noodles, corn, sweet peas, banana pudding, and sweet tea. Review of R38's dinner meal ticket dated 09/20/22 included the following items: veggie burger, buttered parslied noodles,…

    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 · D2022-09-21 · 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 facility policy review, observations, record review, and interview, the facility failed to accommodate a resident's dietary preferences for 1 of 1 resident (R)38, reviewed for food preferences in a total sample of 30 residents. The facility served R38 foods that were not part of his religious dietary preference. This deficient practice could result in reduced consumption for R38. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Nutritional Screening and Assessment/Food Preferences, reviewed January 2021 revealed, Patient/resident food preferences and choices will be honored within reason according to the patient/resident's diet order and menu selections available. During an observation on 09/20/22 at 9:08 AM, R38's breakfast meal tray was observed to have the following items: scrambled eggs, a slice of toast, a sausage link, grits, skim milk, apple juice, coffee, and Nepro (a commercial nutritional shake). Review of R38's breakfast meal ticket dated 09/20/22 included but not limited to 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-09-21 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, record review, policy review, and review of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommendations, the facility failed to ensure appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) was worn into quarantine/isolation resident rooms by two facility contracted staff. This failure had the potential to spread infectious organisms throughout the facility to the 114 current residents and any staff working. Findings include: Review of the CDC's webpage Infection Control Recommendations, updated 02/02/22 revealed HCP [health care professionals] who enter the room of a patient with suspected or confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection should adhere to Standard Precautions and use a NIOSH-approved N95 or equivalent or higher-level respirator, gown, gloves, and eye protection (i.e., goggles or a face shield that covers the front and sides of the face). retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/infection-control-recommendations.html. Review of the facility policy titled…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to PRUITTHEALTH — 95 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 4 of 52.9+1.1 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 52.8+1.2 vs chain
Staffing 2 of 52.5-0.5 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 53.6+0.4 vs chain
The other 94 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.9★, per CMS)
1 of 5Oaks - Athens Skilled Nursing, TheAthens, GA 1 of 5PruittHealth - Holly Hill, LLCValdosta, GA 1 of 5PruittHealth - LilburnLilburn, GA 1 of 5PruittHealth- AikenAiken, SC 1 of 5PruittHealth- ColumbiaColumbia, SC 1 of 5PruittHealth- Rock HillRock Hill, SC 1 of 5PruittHealth-Carolina PointDurham, NC 1 of 5PruittHealth-DurhamDurham, NC 1 of 5PruittHealth-TrentNew Bern, NC 1 of 5PruittHealth-Union PointeMonroe, NC 1 of 5Pruitthealth - AustellAustell, GA 1 of 5Pruitthealth - Lakehaven, LLCValdosta, GA 1 of 5Pruitthealth - MaconMacon, GA 1 of 5Pruitthealth - Magnolia ManorMoultrie, GA 1 of 5Pruitthealth - Old CapitolLouisville, GA 1 of 5Pruitthealth - PalmyraAlbany, GA 1 of 5Pruitthealth - SwainsboroSwainsboro, GA 1 of 5Pruitthealth - ToccoaToccoa, GA 1 of 5Pruitthealth - West AtlantaAtlanta, GA 2 of 5NC State Veterans Home-KinstonKinston, NC 2 of 5PruittHealth - AugustaAugusta, GA 2 of 5PruittHealth- BambergBamberg, SC 2 of 5PruittHealth- DillonDillon, SC 2 of 5PruittHealth- EstillEstill, SC 2 of 5PruittHealth- Moncks CornerMoncks Corner, SC 2 of 5PruittHealth- RidgewayRidgeway, SC 2 of 5PruittHealth-NeuseNew Bern, NC 2 of 5Pruitthealth - BrookhavenAtlanta, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth - CreeksideAugusta, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth - DecaturDecatur, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth - FairburnFairburn, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth - Fleming IslandFleming Island, FL 2 of 5Pruitthealth - ForsythForsyth, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth - GriffinGriffin, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth - Richmond, LLCAugusta, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth - RomeRome, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth - SavannahSavannah, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth - Valdosta, LLCValdosta, GA 2 of 5Pruitthealth-North Tampa, LLCLutz, FL 2 of 5The Oaks-BrevardBrevard, NC

Showing 40 of 94; lowest-rated first.

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

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
UNITED HEALTH SERVICES INCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 07/01/2010
HODGES, BRIGHAMIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 10/04/2020
PRUITTHEALTH INCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 07/01/2010
PRUITT, NEILIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 09/26/2006

2 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.

$15.3M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+1.2%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$4.7M
Related-party expense31% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 71%Medicare 7%Other / private 22%

About 71% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $4.7M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 31% 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 2024. 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

$359per resident / day
operating cost
$10,912per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$363per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2024). 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 SC

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the South Carolina Medicaid page.

Typical monthly cost in South Carolina
$9,034/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$9,612/mo
Nursing home (private)
$5,350/mo
Assisted living

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 425400. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-09-19, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next