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

Inman Healthcare

51 N Main St, Inman, SC 29349 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 40 certified beds · (864) 472-9370 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (864) 472-9370 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 11 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

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

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score

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

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

4/5
CMS overall
4 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 3 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 4 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 5 of 5

Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★ 2/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
12230 Asheville Hwy · (864) 472-2144 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
27 N Main St · (864) 472-2136 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
10 N Howard St · (864) 978-7671 · Call to confirm hours
Park
50 Bishop St · (864) 804-5814 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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 5 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 1 to 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

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

Overall rating4★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased15.5%11.9%15.4%typical
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight6.1%6.3%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.7%0.6%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%1.3%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms10.0%3.1%6.5%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury4.5%3.2%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened12.7%12.7%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication17.1%21.0%18.9%typical
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine86.8%90.6%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers2.3%5.1%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control21.6%16.7%21.2%typical
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table4.5%15.3%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication4.5%1.5%1.4%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.

not reportedno hours filed
Therapy hours / resident / day

Therapy staffing: not reported. This home filed no therapist hours at all in its payroll data for this quarter. That is a gap in what it reported, and we do not read it as an absence of therapy — the homes that file nothing here include ones that discharged hundreds of Medicare rehab patients in the very same period, who plainly received therapy from someone. Because we cannot tell a home that under-reports from one that genuinely provides little, this home is left out of the comparison above rather than scored at zero. Ask it directly how many therapist hours a rehab resident gets, and on which days.

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNFnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNFnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identifiednot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 dischargenot 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 staynot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsenednot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalizationnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.221.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

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

Staffing

0.52
RN hours/ resident / day
0.97
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.76
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.25
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.69
RN hoursweekends
48.6%
Total nursing turnover
28.6%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 40 beds and averages 36.7 residents a day — about 92% occupied, or roughly 3 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.25 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.52 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.76 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 3.13 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.29 on weekdays — 5% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.46 to 0.69 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 49% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

2
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-04-03)
5
at the previous standard inspection (2024-03-07)

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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

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

  • Potential for harm · F2025-04-03 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — widespread
    Ensure 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure palatability for residents' food being served at an appropriate temperature for 3 of 3 residents (Resident (R)29, R31, and R30) out of 13 sampled residents. This failure had the potential to affect all 34 residents (2 puree, 11 mechanical textures, and 21 regular) in the facility, who received food that was cold and undesirable to eat. This had the potential to create dissatisfaction with meals and decrease the residents' quality of life. Findings include: Review of the facility's undated policy titled, Food Temperatures, indicated, Foods will be maintained at proper temperature to ensure food safety. The point of service temperature to residents will be within the range of 120-140 degrees based on the resident's preference. The following range of temperatures is recommended for food at point of tray assembly. Broth, soup, hot beverages 180-190 degrees F [Fahrenheit] 160 Meat, portioned for service degrees…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2025-04-03 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespread
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, interviews and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a handwashing sink was available, personal protective equipment (PPE) was available, failed to maintain the wall space around the dryer vents which left openings in the wall large enough for pests or small rodents to enter, failed to prevent cross contamination from dirty areas to clean areas within the laundry room, failed to provide a system to enable staff to fold clothing on a surface that could be sanitized, failed to store clean clothing, assorted pillows, and towels in an area to maintain cleanliness, and failed to maintain cleanliness and maintenance of two washing machines for one of one laundry room. This failure had the potential to affect infection control measures for 34 of 34 census residents. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Laundry with a review date of 07/14/24, indicated: 1. Aligning with principles of standard precautions, staff should consider all previously worn clothing and used linens as potentially contaminated. 2. The facility's laundry area…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-03-07 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, interviews, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to ensure foods that are stored in the freezer, refrigerators and dry food storage were appropriately sealed, labeled, dated with a use by date and/or discarded after the manufacturer's expiration date. Findings include: Review of the facility's undated policy titled, Food Safety Requirements, showed that food will be stored, prepared, distributed and served in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Policy Explanation and Compliance guidelines: Storage of food in a manner that helps prevent deterioration or contamination of the food, including from growth of microorganisms. Facility staff shall inspect all food, food products, and beverages for safe transport and quality upon delivery/receipt and ensure timely and proper storage. Labeling, dating, and monitoring refrigerated food, including but not limited to leftovers, so it is used by its use-by date, or frozen (where appl)/discarded. During an observation on 03/05/24 at 10:58 AM, the kitchen refrigerator revealed one…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-03-07 · tag F0623 — isolated
    Provide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal 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 facility policy, record review and interviews the facility failed to provide written notices of hospitalization to the Responsible Party (RP) and/or the Resident (R) and failed to ensure that the Ombudsman was notified for (R)3 in a timely manner for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for hospitalizations. The findings include: The facility admitted R3 with diagnoses including but not limited to, cirrhosis of liver, dementia, and history of falling. Review of Nurses Notes for hospitalizations on 02/28/24 revealed documentation from 06/28/2023 at 6:24 PM, Resident stated she wanted to be sent to Emergency Department (ED). This nurse and [another] nurse assessed [patient] pt. Abnormal [vital signs] v/s. Resident states I don't feel good she also stated that her body was aching all over. Resident was slurring her speech and had periodic episodes of rolling her eyes back and screaming I want to go now. Showing [signs and symptoms] s/s of anxiety while waiting on [Emergency Medical Service] EMS. Resident have been…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-03-07 · tag F0625 — isolated
    Notify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to provide the bed hold document to Resident (R)3 and/or Resident Representative (RR) in a timely manner for 1 of 2 reviewed for hospitalization. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Bed Hold and Therapeutic Leave Policy, undated, revealed Before the Center transfers a Resident to a hospital ., the Center must provide this written information to the Resident or the Resident Representative that specifies the Center's bed hold and therapeutic/temporary leave policy. The following applies to all residents. Medicaid Residents-Bed Hold: If the Resident leaves the Center for hospitalization, the Center will reserve or hold a bed available for the Resident for up to ten (10) consecutive calendar days per medically necessary hospital stay when the Resident is expected to return to the Center per South Carolina Medicaid. If the Resident is hospitalized for a period longer than ten (10) days, the Resident will be discharged .…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-03-07 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide services to residents who were unable to carry out activities of daily living (ADL) necessary to maintain good grooming and personal hygiene for Resident (R)9; 1 of 4 reviewed for assistance with ADL care. Findings include: Reviewed the facility's undated policy titled, Activities of Daily Living (ADLs), revealed, Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines 3. a resident who is unable to carry out activities of daily living will receive necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene. Review the facility's undated policy, titled, Nail Care, revealed, Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines: 3. Routine cleaning and inspection of nails will be provided during ADL care on an ongoing basis. 4. Routine nail care, to include trimming and filing, will be provided on a regular schedule (such as weekly on Wednesday 3-11 shift). Nail care will be provided between scheduled occasions as the need arises. Review of the face sheet revealed the…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-03-07 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide 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, observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to administer oxygen per physician's orders for 1 of 1 residents reviewed for respiratory care, Resident (R)17. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Oxygen Administration dated 2024 revealed, Policy: Oxygen is administered to residents who need it, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plans, and resident's goals and preferences. Definitions: 'Oxygen therapy' is the administration of oxygen at concentrations greater than that in ambient air (20.9%) with the intent of treating or preventing the symptoms and manifestations of hypoxia. 'Hypoxia' means decreased perfusion of oxygen to the tissues. Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines: 1. Oxygen is administered under orders of a physician . 2. Personnel authorized to initiate oxygen therapy include physicians, RNs, LPNs, and respiratory therapists. 3. Staff shall document the initial and…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2022-02-18 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — widespread
    Ensure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record reviews, and interviews the facility failed to provide an appropriate alternative to the normal menu. Findings Include: A review of the four (4)-week menu for the facility showed there were no food alternatives shown for the main menu. A review of the policy/procedure titled Dietary Services - Menus and Nutritional Adequacy (no date) showed l. Specially prepared or alternative food requested instead of the food and meals generally prepared by the facility. During an interview on 2/17/2022 at 2:39 p.m., Resident #28 who stated that the food is the biggest complaint of the meetings. She stated that nothing has changed with the complaints, and no one has given them any resolution to their complaints. During an interview on 2/17/2022 at 3:02 p.m., Resident #19 stated that there are times when she/he does not want the food, but most times will not eat the alternative and will just not eat at all. During an interview on 2/18/22 at 9:32 a.m., Activities Director (AD) stated that when residents request an alternative, they have the option of a peanut butter and…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2022-02-18 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation and interviews, the facility failed to follow proper sanitation and food handling practices by maintaining kitchen equipment in a clean and sanitary manner and the facility failed to follow proper sanitation and food handling practices to prevent the outbreak of foodborne illness. The findings included: During the initial tour of the facility on 2/15/22 at 10:03 a.m., it was observed that a dust build up was on the range hood. The range hood cleaning sticker showed the hood was last cleaned in May 2021 and was scheduled to be cleaned again in November 2021. Dust particles were observed along the edge of the hood. During the initial tour of the kitchen on 2/15/22 at 10:13 a.m., an observation of the reach in freezer showed that sausage patties, chopped grilled chicken, and sliced carrots were not stored in closed containers and were not dated and labeled. A request was made twice for a cleaning schedule for the kitchen but was not received. A review of the policy entitled Safety (Revised 8/2013) under the portion entitled Safety Guidelines showed that equipment…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2022-02-18 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — pattern
    Honor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interviews and record reviews the facility failed to ensure that dietary services demonstrated their response to grievances filed by the Resident Council group and residents, and the rationale for such response. Findings include: A review of the policy/procedure with the subject of Resident Right-Grievance (no date) showed that the resident has the right to and the facility will make prompt efforts by the facility to resolve grievances the resident may have, in accordance with this paragraph. A review of the policy/procedure with the subject of Dietary Services - Menus and Nutritional Adequacy (no date) showed that Menus will: (4) Reflect, based on a facility's reasonable efforts, the religious, cultural and ethnic needs of the resident population, as well as input received from residents and resident groups. A review of the four (4)-week menu for the facility showed that there was no bacon offered as part of the menu for breakfast throughout the entirety of the menu cycle. A review of the Resident Council Meeting Minutes showed that on 9/14/21, residents stated that they…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-02-18 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
    Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure controlled substance medications were secured under double lock and key to prevent the potential for residents accidentally ingesting the medications or drug diversion if staff confiscates the medications. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Storage and Expiration Dating of Medications, Biologicals revised 1/1/22, revealed: Store all drugs and biologicals in locked compartments, including Schedule II-V medications in separately locked permanently affixed compartments, permitting only authorized personnel to have access. On 2/15/22 at 9:05 a.m., the Survey Team entered the facility to conduct a Recertification Survey and was directed to work in the Administrator's Office. The office door remained unlocked to allow the team to enter and exit the office as needed. When Registered Nurse (RN) #2 started his/her shift later that day, he/she discovered some resident-controlled medications that needed to be destroyed as the resident had been discharged that day with no…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
YAKAR HOLDINGS, LLCOrganizationDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 03/01/2019
GREENWALD, MICHAELIndividual5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 03/01/2019
MDB HOLDINGS 1 LLCOrganizationINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 07/01/2020
YAKAR OPERATING LLCOrganizationINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 03/01/2019
BOKOR, MICHAELIndividualINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/01/2020
FORD, ALBERTIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/12/2021
IVEY, MEREDITHIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2023
MFC INMAN PROPERTY LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2025

CMS files one row per role, so the 15 rows in the source record cover these 8 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

4 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.

$3.2M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-21.5%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$410K
Related-party expense11% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 83%Medicare 9%Other / private 8%

About 83% 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 $410K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 11% 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

$306per resident / day
operating cost
$9,306per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$252per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

Paying with Medicaid

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

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

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

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 425122. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-04-03, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

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

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

What to do next