St Andrews Operator, LLC
3514 Sidney Road, Columbia, SC 29210 · For profit - Individual · 108 certified beds · (803) 798-9715 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- it has abuse, neglect, or exploitation citations (F0600, F0609) — most recent Apr 2025
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0605, F0607, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- inspectors cited 2 immediate-jeopardy problems — the most serious level
- inspectors recorded 2 serious findings as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (39) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $52,910 in federal fines (most recent 2025-07-17)
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (1/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (79%) runs well above the national median (45%)
- about 18% 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.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 1 of 5 |
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 | 1 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 3 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 1 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 1 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 whose need for help with daily activities increased | 9.6% | 11.9% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 11.7% | 6.3% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.2% | 0.6% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.3% | 1.3% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 4.8% | 3.1% | 6.5% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 3.2% | 3.2% | 3.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 7.5% | 12.7% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 15.7% | 21.0% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 74.4% | 90.6% | 95.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 9.0% | 5.1% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 23.0% | 16.7% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 21.0% | 15.3% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 7.3% | 1.5% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 16.4% | 78.0% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 28.0% | 24.3% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 17.0% | 13.9% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.33 | 2.04 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 3.60 | 1.84 | 1.80 | 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.
39.1% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 54 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 59.3% 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 27 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 0.36 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 62% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 7% 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 | 39.1%CMS range 26.1–54.1 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.4%CMS range 6.5–14.6 | 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 | 59.3% | 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 | 48.1% | 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 | 44.4% | 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 | 100.0% | 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 | 100.0% | 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 1.9% | 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 | 11.3% | 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 | 6.8%CMS range 3.5–13.7 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.96 | 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 108 beds and averages 86.0 residents a day — about 80% occupied, or roughly 22 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 3.44 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.40 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.98 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 3.05 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.60 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.45 to 0.26 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 79% is well above 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 unchanged from the previous inspection. 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.
39 citations, most serious first. The 14 most serious are shown; the remaining 25 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2025-04-29 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect 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 interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to protect one non-interviewable, cognitively impaired Resident (R2) from a non-consensual sexual encounter with R1. Despite prior documentation of R1's inappropriate and unsafe behaviors toward female residents, the facility did not implement timely or adequate interventions to prevent further incidents. On April 25, 2025 at 5:26 PM, the Administrator and Director of Nursing (DON) were notified that the failure to protect Resident (R)2 from a non-consensual sexual encounter with R1 constituted Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) at F600. On April 25, 2025 at 5:26 PM, the survey team provided the Administrator and DON with a copy of the CMS IJ Template and informed the facility the IJ existed as of April 16, 2025. The IJ was related to §483.12 - Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation. On April 28, 2025, the facility provided an acceptable IJ Removal Plan. On April 28, 2025 at 12:00 PM, the survey team validated the facility'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.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2025-04-29 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of facility policy, record review, and interview, the facility failed to report an allegation of potential non-consensual sexual abuse for Resident (R)2 by R1 to the proper authorities/state agency within the appropriate timeframes. On April 28, 2025 at 4:03 PM, the survey team notified the Administrator and DON that the failure to report an allegation of sexual abuse made by residents and staff constituted IJ at F609. On April 28, 2025 at 4:03 PM, the survey team provided the Administrator and DON with a copy of the CMS IJ Template and informed the facility the IJ existed as of April 16, 2025. The IJ was related to §483.12 - Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation. On April 28, 2025, the facility provided an acceptable IJ Removal Plan. On April 29, 2025 at 10:00 AM, the survey team validated the facility's corrective actions were in place as of April 28, 2025 and removed the IJ. The facility remained out of compliance at F609 at a lower scope and severity of D. An extended survey 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.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2021-10-28 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect 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 observations, record review, interviews, and review of the facility policy titled, Elopement and Wandering Residents, the facility failed to ensure neglect did not occur by providing adequate supervision to prevent elopement. Resident (R)26 exited the facility on June 27, 2021 at 4:20 PM unassisted. A nursing staff member identified a man coming up the road with his walker toward the stop sign of [NAME] road, street frontage, as R26. On 10/28/21 at 4:07 PM, the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) and the Director of Nursing (DON) were notified that the facility neglected to provide adequate supervision to prevent elopement for Resident (R) 26. R26 had a successful elopement from the facility on June 27, 2021. R26 was found walking down the street with a walker by a member of the facility staff. R26 was unharmed and did not obtain any injuries. The facility's failure to provide adequate supervision to a resident diagnosed with dementia and who ambulated independently throughout the facility has 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.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2021-10-28 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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, interviews, and review of the facility policy titled, Elopement and Wandering Residents, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision to prevent elopement. Resident (R)26 exited the facility on June 27, 2021 at 4:20 PM unassisted. A nursing staff member identified a man coming up the road with his walker toward the stop sign of [NAME] road, street frontage, as R26. On 10/28/21 at 4:07 PM, the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) and the Director of Nursing (DON) were notified that the facility neglected to provide adequate supervision to prevent elopement for Resident (R) 26. R26 had a successful elopement from the facility on June 27, 2021. R26 was found walking down the street with a walker by a member of the facility staff. R26 was unharmed and did not obtain any injuries. The facility's failure to provide adequate supervision to a resident diagnosed with dementia and who ambulated independently throughout the facility has the potential for serious injury, serious…
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 · F2025-07-17 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure 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 review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure foods that are stored in the freezer, refrigerator and dry food storage were appropriately sealed, labeled, dated with a use by date, and/or discarded after the manufacturer's expiration date in 1 of 1 kitchen.Findings include:Review of the facility's undated policy, titled, Labeling and Dating, revealed Importance of Labeling and Dating Proper labeling and dating ensures that all foods are stored, rotated, and utilized in a First In First Out (FIFO) manner. This will minimize waste and ensure that items that are passed their due date are discarded. Food labels must include: The food item name, the date of preparation/receipt/removal from freezer, the use by date. Leftovers must be labeled and dated with the date they are prepared and the use by date.During an initial observation of the kitchen on 07/15/25 at 9:51 AM, the Dry Food Storage revealed the following:Boxes on the floor.1 - 10-pound (lb) bag of macaroni noodles was opened with no open date and no use-by date.1 - 25 lb 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.
- Potential for harm · F2025-07-17 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — widespreadSet 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 observation, interview, document review, and facility policy review, the facility's quality assurance and performance improvement (QAPI) committee failed to implement effective corrective actions to ensure previously identified deficient practices were corrected and sustained. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all 91 residents who resided in the facility.Cross Reference: F693, F761, and F812.Findings included:Review of a facility policy titled Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) Program Governance and Leadership Policy Statement, revised on 03/2020, revealed, 2. The governing body is responsible for ensuring that the QAPI program: a. Is implemented and maintained to address identified priorities; b. Is sustained through transitions of leadership and staffing; c. Is adequately resourced and funded, including the provision of money, time, equipment, training and staff coverage sufficient to conduct the activities of the program; d. Is based on data, resident and staff input, and other information that measures performance; and e. Focuses on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-07-17 · 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
F880Based on review of facility policy, observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. Specifically, the facility failed to produce documentation of a surveillance plan, based on a facility assessment, for tracking, and/monitoring infections, communicable diseases and outbreaks among residents and staff for the entire year 2024 and the months of January 2025 and February 2025.Findings include:Review of the facility policy titled Monitoring Compliance with Infection Control states, Policy Statement: Routine monitoring and surveillance of the workplace are conducted to determine compliance with infection prevention and control policies and practices.Policy Interpretation and Implementation: 1. The infection preventionist or designee monitors the compliance and effectiveness of our infection prevention and control policies and practices.2.…
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 · Ecited before2025-07-17 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure 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 review of the facility policy, observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to remove expired and discontinued medications from storage and failed to label and date open medications in 3 of 6 medication carts. Findings include:Review of the facility policy titled Medication Labeling and Storage last revised on 02/23 revealed the nursing staff is responsible for maintaining medication storage and preparation in a sanitary manner. If the facility has discontinued, outdated or deteriorated medications or biologic pharmacy is contacted for instructions regarding returning or destroying these items. Labeling of medications and biologicals dispensed by the pharmacy is consistent with applicable federal and state requirements and currently accepted pharmaceutical practices. The medication label includes, at a minimum: expiration date, when applicable.On 07/16/25 at 11:38 AM, observation of the 200 Back Hall medication cart with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN)4 revealed one box of Nutren 2.0 tube feeding formula with an expiration date of 06/27/25; one opened…
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 · D2025-07-17 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure 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 review of facility policy, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure resident assessments accurately reflected the resident's status for pressure ulcers for 1 of 2 residents, Resident (R)10, reviewed for pressure ulcers. Specifically, R10 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with a sacral pressure ulcer that was not documented on his skin assessment or Minimum Data Set (MDS). Findings include:Review of the facility policy titled Resident Assessments last revised on 03/22 revealed, 1. The resident assessment coordinator is responsible for ensuring that the interdisciplinary team conducts timely and appropriate resident assessments and reviews.Review of the facility policy titled Functional Impairment - Clinical Protocol last revised 03/18 revealed, Upon admission to the facility, whenever a significant change of condition occurs, and periodically during a resident/patient's stay, the physician and staff will assess the resident/patient's function along with their physical…
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 · D2025-07-17 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
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 interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to timely develop a baseline care plan for 1 (Resident (R)502) of 7 sampled residents.Findings include:Review of an undated facility policy titled Care Plans-Baseline revealed, A baseline plan of care to meet the resident's immediate health and safety needs is developed for each resident within forty-eight (48) hours of admission.Review of an admission Record revealed the facility admitted R502 on 07/16/25. According to the admission Record, the resident had a medical history that included but was not limited to diagnoses of cerebral infarction, hyperglycemia, aphasia, and gastrostomy status.Review of R502's medical record revealed a care plan report for an admission date of 07/16/25. The care plan report initiated on 08/06/25 indicated the resident was admitted to the facility with pressure areas to several areas of their body and non-pressure areas to the back and left ear.During an interview on 08/23/25 at 3:30 PM, the Minimum…
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 · D2025-07-17 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolatedEnsure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
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, observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident with continuous tube feed received the correct ordered amount and rate of tube feed. The facility also failed to label and date a tube feed bag for 1 of 1 resident, Resident (R)9 reviewed for tube feedings. Specifically, R9's tube feed was infusing at 45 milliliters (ml) per hour (hr) instead of the physician's ordered rate of 50 ml per hour.Review of the facility policy titled Enteral Tube Feeding via Continuous Pump last revised on 11/18, states, The purpose of this procedure is to provide a guideline for the use of a pump for enteral feedings. General Guidelines. 3. Check the enteral nutrition label against the order before administration. Check the following information: Resident name, ID and room number; Type of formula; Date and time formula was prepared; and Rate of administration mL/hour. Initiate Feeding. On the formula label document initials, date and time the formula 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 · D2025-07-17 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of facility policy, record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to provide respiratory care in accordance with professional standards. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure one nebulizer machine, one oxygen mask and one medication chamber were clean and/or bagged when not in use for 1 of 2 residents (Resident (R)82), reviewed for respiratory care.Findings include:Review of the facility's policy titled Nebulizer Therapy, with a revision date of October 2024, revealed, Purpose: The purpose of this procedure is to safely administer aerosolized particles of medication into the resident's airway. Steps in the Procedure: 1. Obtain equipment (i.e., administration set up, plastic bag, gauze sponge). 2. Wash hands. 3. After completion of therapy: a. Remove the nebulizer container; b. Rinse the container with fresh tap water; and c. Dry on a clean paper towel or gauze sponge. 4. Reconnect to the administration setup when air dried. 5. Take care not to contaminate internal nebulizer…
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 before2025-04-29 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — widespreadEnsure 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 review of the facility policy and procedures, observations and interviews, the facility failed to maintain water temperatures within safe limits. This failure placed residents with access to hand sinks/showers at a potential risk for scalding injuries for three of three halls reviewed. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Water Temperatures, Safety of last revised December 2009, states, Tap water in the facility shall be kept within a temperature range to prevent scalding of residents. Policy Interpretation and Implementation, Water heaters that service resident rooms, bathrooms, common areas, and tub/shower areas shall be set to temperatures of no more than 120° [Fahrenheit] F or 48.88°[Celsius] C, or the maximum allowable temperature per state regulation . If at any time water temperatures feel excessive to the touch (i.e., hot enough to be painful or cause reddening of the skin after removal of the hand from the water), staff will report this finding to the immediate supervisor .…
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 · Ecited before2025-04-29 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — patternHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, record reviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure 3 of 5 residents reviewed for dignity (Resident (R)3, R4, and R5) were treated in a manner that maintained and promoted their dignity and sense of safety after reporting or witnessing a potential non-consensual sexual encounter involving a non-interviewable resident (R2). Cross-Reference: F600 §483.12 Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation. Findings include: Record review of facility policy titled Quality of Life Dignity last revised February 2020 revealed Each resident shall be cared for in a manner that promotes and enhances his or her sense of well-being, level of satisfaction with life, feeling of self-worth and self-esteem. Policy interpretation and implementation include residents are treated with dignity and respect at all times. The facility culture is one that supports and encourages humanization and individuation of residents, and honors resident choices, preferences, values, and beliefs.…
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 25 citations
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-29 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — isolatedPrevent the use of unnecessary psychotropic medications or use medications that may restrain a resident's ability to function.
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 interview, record review, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure Resident (R)1 was being monitored for the use of Psychotropic Medication, for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for chemical restraints. Findings include: Review of the undated facility policy titled Psychotropic Medication Use revealed, Residents will not receive medications that are not clinically indicated to treat a specific condition. A psychotropic medication is any medication that affects brain activity associated with mental processes and behavior. Drugs in the following categories are considered psychotropic medications and are subject to prescribing, monitoring, and review requirements specific to psychotropic medications: anti-psychotics; anti-depressants; anti-anxiety medications; and hypnotics. Residents, families, and or/or the representative are involved in the medication management process. Psychotropic medication management include indications for use; dose (including duplicate therapy); duration; adequate…
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 · Dcited before2025-04-29 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of facility policy, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement their abuse policies Abuse Investigation and Reporting and Abuse Prevention Program regarding an allegation of sexual abuse for 2 of 5 residents (Resident (R)1 and R2) reviewed for abuse. Specifically, the facility failed to investigate, report, prevent and or protect allegations of sexual abuse. Findings Include: Review of facility policy titled Abuse Investigation and Reporting last revised July 2017 revealed .5. The administrator will ensure that any further potential abuse, neglect exploitation or mistreatment is prevented. Role of the Investigator: 1. The individual conducting the investigation will, as a minimum: g. interview staff members (on all shifts) who have had contact with the resident during the period of the alleged incident. interview the resident's roommate, family members, and visitors j. review all events leading up to the alleged incident. Review of facility policy titled Abuse Prevention Program last revised December 2016, revealed, As part of the resident abuse…
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 · E2024-01-24 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to serve foods palatable, safe, and at an appetizing temperature for six residents (Resident (R) 88, R1, R3, R6, R7, and R18) out of 31 sample residents. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Meal Distribution, dated August 2022 and provided by the facility administrator, revealed that hot foods should be held at a temperature of equal to or greater than 136 degrees F [Fahrenheit] until served. During an interview on 01/22/24 at 9:52 AM, R88 stated that he received cold breakfast food when he received breakfast in his room. Review of the Resident Council meeting minutes, dated 12/29/23, indicated the breakfast grits were cold when served. During a resident group meeting conducted on 01/23/24, at 12:43 PM, five residents (R1, R3, R6, R7, and R18) in attendance agreed that food served in the dining room was hot but residents that ate in their room received cold food, and that the breakfast biscuits with gravy and grits were always cold. A test tray was reviewed alongside…
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 · Dcited before2024-01-24 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to serve meals to the residents eating at the same table, at the same time, promoting dignity and well-being for three of four residents (Resident (R) 29, R4, and R88) of 31 sample residents. Findings include: During an observation of meal service in the dining room on 01/23/24 at 12:11 PM, R29 received her meal tray at 12:11 PM with three other residents seated at the same table without food. R4 was seated next to R29 and did not receive her meal tray. R4 appeared to be anxious while waiting to receive her meal tray. During an interview on 01/23/24 at 12:13 PM, R29 stated that she would not eat her meal until the other residents at the table received their meal. She said, it is rude to eat in front of others that didn't have their food. Observation of meal service on 01/23/24 at 12:26 PM, R4 received her meal tray at 12:26 PM. The other two residents seated at the same table received a meal tray at 12:32 PM and 12:36 PM. During an interview on 01/23/24 at 12:15 PM, the Dietary Manager…
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 · Dcited before2024-01-24 · 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
Based on interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a comprehensive care plan was developed for dementia for one of two residents (Residents (R) 28) sampled for dementia care. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Care Planning, dated 07/17, revealed The purpose of the Care Planning . is to ensure that each resident receives the necessary care and services to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental and psychosocial wellbeing, in accordance with the comprehensive assessment and plan of care and resident desires. Review of R28's Face Sheet located in the electronic medical record (EMR) under the Resident Profile tab, revealed an admission date of 08/12/23 and readmission date of 11/17/23 with medical diagnoses that included adult failure to thrive and dementia. Review of R28's significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 11/23/23 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of six out of 15, which indicated severe cognitive impairment. During an…
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 · D2024-01-24 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents who were dependent on staff for Activities of Daily Living (ADL) assistance received fingernail care services for one of three residents (Resident (R) R58) of 31 sample residents. This failure placed residents at risk for diminished self-worth, self-esteem, feelings of embarrassment, and/or medical issues. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Activities of Daily Living (ADL), dated November 2017, documented: The objective of the Activities of Daily Living Policy is to ensure that residents maintain their highest practicable level . A resident who is unable to carry out activities of daily living will received the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal care, and oral hygiene. Review of R58's Face Sheet located under the Resident Profile tab located in the electronic medical record (EMR) revealed R58 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with…
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 · D2024-01-24 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure that one of three residents (Resident (R)13) reviewed for splinting of 31 sample residents received the orthotic devices ordered by the Physician. This practice has the potential for other residents to be at risk for decreased range of motion and/or worsening of their contracture. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Resident Mobility and Range of Motion (ROM), dated December 2017, documented: The purpose of the Resident Mobility and ROM policy is to ensure each resident maintains their highest level of function in regards to range of motion and mobility .Residents with limited range of motion will receive treatment and services to increase and/or prevent a further decrease in ROM. Residents with limited mobility will receive appropriate services, equipment, and assistance to maintain or improve mobility unless reduction in mobility is unavoidable. Review of R13's Face Sheet located…
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 · D2024-01-24 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure to document the resident's condition upon return from dialysis treatment for one of one resident (Resident (R)52) reviewed for dialysis care. As a result of this deficient practice potential hemodynamic instability could go unnoticed and compromise the care of the dialysis resident after treatment. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Dialysis, dated 11/17 and revised on 02/21, revealed The facility will conduct ongoing assessment of the resident's condition and monitor for complications prior to and after dialysis treatments received at a certified dialysis facility . The facility will participate in ongoing communication with the dialysis center for the development and implementation of the dialysis care plan . The facility will communicate using the Dialysis Communication form which is filed in the resident's medical record. Review of R52's Face Sheet located under the Resident Profile tab in the electronic medical record (EMR) revealed an admission date of 07/06/23…
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 · D2024-01-24 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure 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
Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents on psychotropic medications were adequately monitored for side effects, behaviors, and results documented for two of five residents (Resident (R) 28 and R6) reviewed for unnecessary medications of 31 sample residents. As a result of this deficient practice residents on antipsychotic medications not being monitored for behaviors may be over or under medicated. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Psychotropic Medication, dated 02/2019, revealed Residents are not given psychotropic drugs unless the medication is necessary to treat a specific condition, as diagnosed and documented in the clinical records, and the medication is beneficial to the resident, as demonstrated by monitoring and documentation of the resident's response to the medication(s) .Nursing monitors psychotropic drug use daily noting any adverse effects such as an increase somnolence or functional decline. 1. Review of R28's Face Sheet located under the Resident Profile tab of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-01-24 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure that one of two refrigerators and sinks during observations of one of two medication rooms were cleaned for 94 census residents. Findings include: Review of the undated facility's policy titled, Storage of Medications revealed: Medication storage areas are to be kept clean Medication storage conditions are monitored on a monthly basis by the consultant pharmacy or appropriate pharmacy representative and corrective action taken if problems are identified . During an interview on 01/24/24 at 7:14 AM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 2 stated the medication storage room was kept locked and only nurses had keys to the room. She stated the nurses were responsible for keeping the refrigerator and sink cleaned in the medication storage room. During an observation on 01/23/24 at 3:43 PM, the inside of the refrigerator on the 300 unit had sticky orange and black material and dust particles on the bottom of the storage shelves on the inside door of the refrigerator and the bottom of the refrigerator under…
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 · F2021-10-28 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — widespreadKeep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff and resident interviews, observations, and review of the facility's policy, it was determined the facility failed to provide personal privacy for 12 of 12 residents who attended the Resident Council interview (Resident (R) 9, 6, 10, 19, 21, 42, 47, 49, 68, 69, 81 and 437) when making phone calls from the phone provided by the facility. This failure had the potential to create an undignified existence for the 12 residents who voiced they were unable to carry on private telephone conversations. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Resident Rights, dated December 2016, revealed the facility ensured that each resident has a dignified existence, self-determination, and communication with and access to persons and services inside and outside the facility. The facility ' s undated admission Agreement documented, Personal privacy includes accommodations, medical treatment, written and telephone communication. On 10/26/21 at approximately 1:30 PM during an interview with the Resident Council, the 12 residents in attendance complained they were not able…
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 · D2021-10-28 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, interviews and review of the facility policy titled, Advance Directives, the facility failed to ensure Resident #70 and Resident #7 were afforded the right to formulate an Advance Directive for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for Advance Directives. The findings included: The facility admitted Resident #70 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, Epilepsy/Seizures, Shortness of Breath, Anxiety, Schizoaffective Disorder, Pulmonary Hypertension, and Congestive Heart Failure. The facility admitted Resident #7 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, Altered Mental Status, Seizures, Impulse Disorder, Dementia with Behaviors, Orthostatic Hypotension. Review on 10/26/2021 at approximately 10:00 AM of the medical record for Resident #70 revealed an Advance Directive signed by his/her Personal Representative. No documentation could be found in the medical record for Resident #70 deeming him/her unable to make his/her own healthcare decisions by 2 physicians. Review on 10/27/2021 at approximately 9:45 AM of the medical record for Resident #7 revealed an Advance…
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 · Dcited before2021-10-28 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and records review, the facility failed to implement the policy for abuse for 2 of 5 Residents (R) (R52 and R79) being reviewed for abuse. Findings include; During an interview on 10/25/21 at 2:48 PM, R52 stated that during her bath sometime last month, a Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) became upset and said she was too heavy, so he started jerking her around and hurt her. She said she let staff know and they did an x-ray. She was told the x-rays did not show anything, but she was still in pain. Review of R52's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 09/08/21, revealed she scored a 15 out of 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS), indicating she was cognitively intact. R52 was totally dependent on staff for mobility and all activities of daily living (ADLs). A 09/30/21 Progress Note found in R52's electronic medical record (EMR) documented, Patient has been teary eyed and upset on current shift. States, 'my leg and thigh hurt' . Patient states that a male CNA had been completing ADLs and placed…
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 · Dcited before2021-10-28 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely 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 interviews, record reviews and review of the facility's abuse policy, the facility failed to report alleged violations in a timely manner for 2 of 5 Residents (R) (R52 and R79) being reviewed for abuse. Findings include: Review of R52's Progress Notes revealed a note on 09/30/21, which documented an allegation of abuse by a facility Certified Nurse Aide (CNA). On 10/27/2021 at 10:50 AM, the Administrator provided the Incident Report, which did not document reporting to the State Agency. The Administrator stated that he did not report the allegation of abuse to the State Agency because he did not think it qualified as reportable as he felt the resident's allegation was not valid. However, he had failed to conduct a thorough investigation to rule out abuse (cross-reference F610: Abuse Investigation. Review of R79's Progress Notes revealed entries for 05/29/20, 07/21/20, 10/20/20, 12/13/20, and 12/17/20 which all referenced allegations of incidents where an injury occurred during staff assisting resident with activities of daily living. On 10/27/21 at 12:45 PM, 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 · D2021-10-28 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse were thoroughly investigated for two (Resident (R) 52 and R79) of five residents reviewed for abuse. The facility had multiple incidents of alleged abuse for R79 and one incident of alleged abuse for R52 that were not properly investigated. This failure had the potential to contribute to the lack of prevention of abuse and protection of the residents from harm and abuse. Findings include: 1. Review of R52's Progress Notes revealed a note on 09/30/21, which documented an allegation of abuse by a facility Certified Nurse Aide (CNA). On 10/27/2021 at 10:50 AM in an interview with the Administrator, he recalled the incident on 09/30/21 and provided the Incident Report and investigative documentation. Review of the documents provided showed only an interview conducted with R52 by the Administrator and an interview that the Family Nurse Practitioner conducted with the writer of the 09/30/21 Progress Note. Based on an interview with the Social Worker on 10/27/21 at 10:37,…
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 · D2021-10-28 · tag F0645 — isolatedPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
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, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to provide the Pre-admission Screening and Annual Resident Review (PASARR) for mental illness (MI) and intellectual disability (ID) for 1 out of 19 residents reviewed during the initial pool. Findings include: Resident (R) 19 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including, but not limited to, Schizophrenia and unspecified dementia without behavioral disturbance . Review of R19's records revealed that there was no PASARR, in neither the electronic nor paper chart, completed. Interview was conducted with the facility Social Worker at 10:20 AM on 10/28/21 in regard to the resident not having a PASARR in either the paper or electronic charts. She stated that when the resident was first admitted , they were under a waiver that started shortly after the height of COVID-19 for newly admitted residents hence why this resident didn't have one. The waiver that the Social Worker was referring to was sent out by [NAME] D. Baker,…
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 · Dcited before2021-10-28 · 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
Based on staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility's policy, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive, person-centered Care Plan addressing the use of antipsychotic medication for one (Resident (R) 46) of five residents reviewed for Unnecessary Medications. This failure created a potential for inconsistent monitoring and inadequate behavior and medication management for R46. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Care Planning, dated July 2017, revealed the facility ensured that each resident receives the necessary care and services to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being, in accordance with the comprehensive assessment and plan of care the resident desired. Review of R46's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 09/01/21, revealed R46 ' s cognition was severely impaired with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of three out of 15. Review of R46's October 2021 Physician Orders revealed an order, which originated on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2021-10-28 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews and review of the facility policy titled, Procedure: Guidelines for Cleansing and Observing a Wound, the facility failed to follow a procedure to ensure proper wound care for Resident #24 for 1 of 3 resident's reviewed for pressure ulcers. The findings included: The facility admitted Resident #24 with diagnoses including, but not limited to, Stage 3 and 4 Pressure ulcers, Multiple Contractures, Anoxic Brain Injury, Convulsions and Encephalopathy. An observation of wound care on 10/27/2021 at approximately 11:45 AM was noted as follows: The Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #4, the wound care nurse knocked on the door and asked permission to enter. This surveyor asked permission to observe wound care and the resident could not answer. The LPN provided privacy. Both LPN #4 and the Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) that was assisting LPN #4 washed their hands and applied gloves and brought the table to the right side of the bed, and opened the supplies, used a pen and wrote the date and time on the outer foam dressing and cut the calcium alginate, helped…
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 · D2021-10-28 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to develop and implement a nutrition prevention intervention plan to prevent significant weight loss for one of one sampled resident, Resident (R) 25, reviewed for nutrition. Findings include: R25 is a [AGE] year-old resident with a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 2, indicating R25 has a severe impaired cognitive status. R25 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including but not limited to hyperlipidemia, vitamin D deficiency, pure hypercholesterolemia, dysphagia, idiopathic peripheral autonomic neuropathy, and pseudo-bulbar affect. An observation on 10/26/21 at 9:05 AM, revealed R25 was in bed sleeping. On 10/26/21 at approximately 12 PM revealed R25 sitting at the nurse's station of unit 200. On 10/27/21 at 9:00 AM, R25 was in bed sleeping. At 11:42 AM on 10/27/21, R25 was actively participating in a singing activity in the dining room. S/he stayed in the dining room after the activity and had lunch. S/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 · D2021-10-28 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
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 staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility's policy titled, Psychotropic Medication, the facility failed to ensure two (Residents (R) 46 and R3) of five residents reviewed for Unnecessary Medications was free from unnecessary antipsychotic medication use. The failure to ensure adequate indication for use and adequate monitoring for effectiveness of antipsychotic medication placed R46 at potential of adverse side effects of using unnecessary antipsychotic medication. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Psychotropic Medication, dated February 2019, revealed the facility was to ensure appropriate use of psychotropic medications as well as ongoing evaluation and monitoring. The policy documented, Residents are not given psychotropic drugs unless the medication is necessary to treat a specific condition, as diagnosed and documented in the clinical records. Review of R46's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 09/01/21,…
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 · D2021-10-28 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure 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 observations, interviews, and review of the facility policy titled, Medication Administration - General Guidelines, the facility failed to ensure a medication administration error rate of less than 5% for 5 out of 28 opportunities for errors. The medication error rate was 17.86%. The findings include: The facility admitted R286 receiving Lovenox 40 milligrams (mg) subcutaneously, prophylactically. An observation on 10/27/21 at approximately 8:05 AM revealed Registered Nurse (RN)1 administering Lovenox 40 mg subcutaneously in the left arm and not the abdomen and then RN1 massaged the area vigorously. An interview on 10/27/21 at approximately 8:07 AM with RN1 confirmed that s/he did administer the Love[DATE] mg in the left arm and then rubbed the injection site. Review of the recommendations from the Institute of Safe Medical Practice on 10/27/21 at approximately 2:00 PM states under, How to inject Enoxaparin (Lovenox), cleanse an infection site 2 inches to the right or left of the belly button using an…
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 · D2021-10-28 · 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 observations, interviews, and review of information from the Institute of Safe Medical Practice, the facility failed to ensure Resident (R) 286, R285, and R70 were free from significant medication errors for 3 residents receiving medications for 5 out of 28 opportunities for error. The findings include: The facility admitted R286 receiving Lovenox 40 milligrams (mg) subcutaneously, prophylactically. An observation on 10/27/21 at approximately 8:05 AM revealed Registered Nurse (RN)1 administering Lovenox 40 mg subcutaneously in the left arm and not the abdomen and then RN1 massaged the area vigorously. An interview on 10/27/21 at approximately 8:07 AM with RN1 confirmed that s/he did administer the Love[DATE] mg in the left arm and then rubbed the injection site. Review of the recommendations from the Institute of Safe Medical Practice on 10/27/21 at approximately 2:00 PM states under, How to inject Enoxaparin (Lovenox), cleanse an infection site 2 inches to the right or left of the belly button using an…
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 · Dcited before2021-10-28 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and review of the facility policy titled, Storage of Medications, the facility failed to remove an expired medication from 1 of 3 medication rooms. The findings include: An observation on [DATE] at 9:00 AM of the 300 Hall Medication Storage Room revealed: 4 Single Dose vials of Pneumoccal Vaccine Polyvalent, Pneumovax 23, Lot- T021329, Expired [DATE]. SN100895443592, CTN-00300064943009. An interview on [DATE] at 9:10 AM with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #5 confirmed the findings. Review on [DATE] at 9:45 AM of the facility policy titled, Storage of Medications, states under Section 1, Purpose, The purpose of the Storage of Medications policy is to ensure proper medication storage. Under Section V, number 5 states, Discontinued, outdated, or deteriorated drugs or biologicals are returned to the dispensing pharmacy or destroyed.
- Potential for harm · D2021-10-28 · 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
Based on staff interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the electronic Medication Administration Record (MAR) was complete and accurate for one (Resident (R) 52) of 19 residents whose medical records were reviewed. Specifically, staff did not document the administration of controlled medications on the MAR to reflect actual usage by the resident or accurately document her pain rating on the MAR. This failure had the potential to contribute to drug diversion and the potential to lead to inadequate pain control for R52. Findings include: Review of R52's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 09/08/21 noted that the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating no cognitive impairments. R52 required total assistance for all activities of daily living and had diagnoses of depression, bipolar disorder, chronic pain syndrome, and anxiety disorder due to known physiological condition. R52 experienced frequent pain at a level of four out of 10. During an interview with R52 on 10/25/21 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.
- Potential for harm · D2021-10-28 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — isolatedMake sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to maintain and ensure the call light system was properly working for one (Resident (R) 57) of 19 residents reviewed for functioning call lights. This failure had the potential to delay staff response in the event of an emergency or unmet need. Findings include: During an interview on 10/26/21 at 9:15 AM with R57 in his room, he stated that the call light did not work properly. R57 stated the call light would alarm and light up at the nurses' station, but the light above the door did not light up. On 10/26/21 at 9:30 AM, R57's call light was activated, but the light was not working outside the door of the room. At the nurses' station, a light at the station panel was illuminated and an alarm was sounding for R57's room. On 10/26/21 at 9:32 AM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 7 stated the light should light up over the room door and at the nurses' station. He stated he would talk with maintenance to get it fixed. On 10/28/21 at approximately 10:15 AM, R57's call light was activated in the presence of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“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
$52,910 in federal fines across 3 penalties.
- $5,947 — penalty dated 2025-07-17
- $5,948 — penalty dated 2025-07-17
- $41,015 — penalty dated 2025-04-29
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 YAD HEALTHCARE — 13 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 →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 1 of 5 | 1.7 | -0.7 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 1 of 5 | 2.2 | -1.2 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 1.3 | +0.7 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 1 of 5 | 2.8 | -1.8 vs chain |
The other 12 homes this chain runs (chain average 1.7★, per CMS)
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 / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ST ANDREWS HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 06/01/2024 |
| WEST NC HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 06/01/2024 |
| ALTER, TZVI | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 06/01/2024 |
| BLUM, WAYNE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 06/01/2024 |
| PATEL, PRADEEP | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 01/01/2025 |
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.
About 72% 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 $1.7M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 18% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in SC
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.
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 425129. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-07-17, 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.