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

Lake Emory Post Acute Care

59 Blackstock Road, Inman, SC 29349 · For profit - Corporation · 88 certified beds · (864) 472-2028 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Flagged for abuseBehavioral-health or dementia-care citation — no harm found (F0758)1 actual-harm citation2 immediate-jeopardy citations CMS recorded as corrected before the inspection ended (past non-compliance)$27,147 in federal fines
Insights

This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.

Worth asking about
  • CMS has flagged it for abuse
  • it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Aug 2025
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • it has 1 actual-harm citation
  • 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
  • the CMS record shows $27,147 in federal fines (most recent 2026-01-23)
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
  • its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
  • nursing-staff turnover (60%) 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.

1/5
CMS overall
1 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 2 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 1 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 2 of 5

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
Cvs0.7 mi
11211 Asheville Hwy · (864) 472-2831 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
11495 Asheville Hwy · (864) 708-1941 · Call to confirm hours
Park
251 4th 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 2 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 2 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 2 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

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

Overall rating2★
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 increased31.2%11.9%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight3.1%6.3%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.6%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.9%1.3%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms8.9%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 injury5.6%3.2%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened24.4%12.7%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication26.6%21.0%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine97.4%90.6%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers7.5%5.1%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control23.7%16.7%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table14.4%15.3%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication2.0%1.5%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine75.0%78.0%79.4%typical

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.

34.9% 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 35 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

34.9%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.2%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
0.20U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.11hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.07hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.02hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.20 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 23% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 9% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF34.9%CMS range 24.5–51.951.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.2%CMS range 6.8–14.610.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at 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 hospitalization9.0%CMS range 4.0–15.17.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.161.02Oct 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

0.21
RN hours/ resident / day
1.08
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.82
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.12
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.19
RN hoursweekends
60.5%
Total nursing turnover
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 88 beds and averages 85.1 residents a day — about 97% occupied, or roughly 3 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. 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 3.12 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.21 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.82 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.87 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.22 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.22 to 0.19 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 60% is well above 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 (2025-08-26)
1
at the previous standard inspection (2024-07-18)

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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

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

  • Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2024-08-14 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
    Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, record review, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure Residents (R)2 and R3 were free from neglect, which resulted in R2 and R3 successfully eloping from the facility, for 2 of 6 residents reviewed for neglect. On 08/13/24 at 6:31, PM, the Administrator was notified that the failure to properly supervise two residents, resulting in the two residents successfully eloping from the facility, constituted Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) at F600. On 08/14/24 at 12:52 PM, the survey team provided the Administrator with a copy of the CMS Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) Template, informing the facility IJ existed as of 08/11/24. The IJ was related to 42 CFR 483.25 - Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation. On 08/14/24, the facility provided an acceptable IJ Removal Plan. On 08/14/24, the survey team, validated the facility's corrective actions and determined the facility did their due diligence in addressing the noncompliance at F600. The IJ is considered at Past Noncompliance as 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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2024-08-14 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, record review and review of facility policy, the facility failed to provide appropriate supervision to prevent Resident (R)2, and (R)3's elopement from the facility. On 08/13/24 at 6:31 PM, the Administrator was notified that the failure to properly supervise two residents, resulting in the two residents successfully eloping from the facility, constituted Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) at F689. On 08/13/24 at 6:31 PM, the survey team provided the Administrator with a copy of the CMS Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) Template, informing the facility IJ existed as of 08/11/24. The IJ was related to 42 CFR 483.25 - Free of Accident Hazards/Supervision. On 08/14/24, the facility provided an acceptable IJ Removal Plan. On 08/14/24, the survey team, validated the facility's corrective actions and determined the facility did their due diligence in addressing the noncompliance at F689. The IJ is considered at Past Noncompliance as of 08/12/24. An extended survey was conducted in conjunction with the Complaint Survey…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Actual harm · Gcited beforedisputed · IIDR2026-01-23 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, record reviews, interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision and maintain an environment free from accidental hazards for one (1) of two (2) residents reviewed for falls (Resident (R)15). R15 had ten documented falls between August 24, 2025, and December 12, 2025, three (3) of which resulted in fractures. A fall on August 24, 2025, resulted in a nasal fracture, and a fall on September 10, 2025, resulted in a subdural hematoma and right clavicle fracture. Specifically, the facility failed to identify an environmental hazard for a resident with a known history of falls. On December 12, 2025 at 3:20 p.m., the facility failed to identify an environmental hazard for a resident with a known history of falls. The facility staff left a grey rolling trash can near the resident's room; when the resident tried to use the trash can for support, it rolled away, causing the resident to fall and sustain a right femur fracture. Findings include:The facility's policy, Accident/Incident Reporting, revised 11/1/17, defined an incident as any…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-26 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
    Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to protect the resident's right to be free from physical abuse by a resident for one of four residents (Resident (R) 13) reviewed for abuse of 21 sample residents. This failure had the potential to affect resident safety.Findings include: Review of the facility's undated policy titled, Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation, or Mistreatment, revealed The facility's leadership prohibits neglect, mental, physical and/or verbal abuse. Types of abuse include but are not limited to: A. Physical assault/abuse: 1) Hitting 2) Slapping.Review of R13's Face Sheet located under the Resident-Face Sheet tab of the electronic medical record (EMR) revealed the resident was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Alzheimer's disease, vascular dementia, and major depressive disorder. Review of the annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 05/14/25, located under the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) - MDS 3.0…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-26 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to report an allegation of staff to resident physical abuse for one of two (Residents (R)18) abuse allegations reviewed in the sample of 21 residents to the State Agency (SA) immediately, but no later than 2 hours after the allegation was made when the incident involved abuse. This failure had the possibility to negatively impact all 83 residents currently residing at the facility.Findings include:Review of the facility's policy titled, Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation, or Mistreatment, revised 11/01/17, indicated, . The facility shall report immediately, but not later than two hours after the allegation is make if the allegation is made, if the events that cause the allegation involve abuse or result in serious bodily injury, or not later than 24 hours if the events that cause the allegation do not result in serious bodily injury to the Administrator of the facility and to other officials (including to the State Survey Agency and adult…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-11 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview, record review, facility document review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to timely report a resident-to-resident abuse allegation to the State Agency for 1 (Resident (R)3) of 3 residents reviewed for abuse. Findings include: An undated facility policy titled, Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation, or Mistreatment, specified, 1. The facility's Leadership prohibits neglect, mental, physical and/or verbal abuse, use of a physical and/or chemical restraint not required to treat a medical condition, involuntary seclusion, corporal punishment, and misappropriation of a patient's/resident's property and/or funds and ensures that alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source and misappropriation of resident property, and [sic] are reported immediately. 2. The Facility shall report immediately, but not later than 2 hours after the allegation is made, if the events that cause the allegation involve abuse or result in serious bodily injury, or not later than 24 hours if the events that cause 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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-14 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
    Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of facility policy, record review, and interview, the facility failed to notify the responsible party for Resident (R) 2 and R3, of an elopement, for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for elopement. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Elopement dated 11/01/17, documented, When the resident is located . The Director of Nurses or the designee notifies the Administrator/designee and notifies the appropriate community agencies, attending physician and the residents legal representative. Review of R2's Face Sheet revealed the facility admitted R2 on 09/13/22, with diagnoses including but not limited to: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, vascular dementia, Alzheimer's Disease, and major depressive disorder. Review of R2's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 06/18/24, revealed R2 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 6 out of 15, indicating R2 had severe cognitive impairment. Review of R3's Face Sheet revealed R3 was admitted to…

    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 · F2024-07-18 · 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 observations, interviews, and a review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure foods stored in the refrigerator, and nourishment kitchen were free from expiration. This failure had the potential to affect residents in the facility who consumed food from the kitchen and received food from the nourishment kitchen. Findings include: A review of the facility's policy titled, Nutrition policy and procedures on cleaning walk-in refrigerator with a complete revision date of 06/20/2023 states 2. Verify that all products are properly labeled and dated. On 07/16/2024 at 10:35 AM and 07/18/2024 at 04:45 PM, the following observations in the kitchen and nourishment kitchen were made with and verified by the Dietary Manager (DM): Main refrigerator/Cooler-Two clear bags, both with 6 heads of lettuce each with no open date and a use-by date of 06/17/2024 listed on the bag. All 12 heads of lettuce in the bags were brown with pink build-up surrounding the entire head of lettuce. An observation of the nourishment kitchen, located in B Hall on 7/18/2024 at 4:34 PM 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-08-24 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
    Honor 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure Resident (R)6 was treated with dignity by failing to ensure his catheter bag was covered to promote privacy. Finding include: Review of the admission Record revealed R6 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including but not limited to, major depressive disorder and Parkinson's disease. Review of R6's Minimum Data Set (MDS), located in the Electronic Medical Record (EMR) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 06/30/23, revealed R6 has a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 12 out of 15, indicating the resident was moderately cognitively intact. During an observation, R6 was observed sitting up in bed on 08/24/23 at 12:25 PM. He appeared unkempt, with long facial hair, and his catheter bag was full without a privacy bag. The privacy bag was observed at 12:25 PM and 1:56 PM on 08/24/23. An interview on 08/24/23 at 1:56 PM with R6 revealed that he does prefer to have his face shaved and it has not been shaved today. 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2023-02-03 · 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 review of the facility's policy, observations, and interview, the facility failed to ensure the processing of clean and dirty laundry was separated in the laundry room; and failed to ensure accessibility for handwashing for laundry staff. This failure effected all laundered items and any of the facility's 83 residents who received laundered items. Findings include: Review of the facility's Infection Prevention and Control Policies and Procedures, Subject: Linen and Laundry Services, completed revision 09/2011. Laundry Facilities: 1. A. Laundry areas are housed away from patient/resident care areas. B. The soiled laundry area is separated from the clean, through either use of negative pressure for the soiled area, or by physical separation. C. Areas where laundry is processed have hand washing facilities, appropriate hand washing supplies and personal protective equipment available for staff use. On 02/03/23 at 10:55 AM, a tour of the laundry room was conducted with the Acting Laundry Supervisor (ALS). The laundry room had one door entry for the clean and dirty processing 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-02-03 · tag F0638 — isolated
    Assure that each resident’s assessment is updated at least once every 3 months.
    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 Resident Assessment Instrument Manual, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to complete a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment within the regulatory timeframe for one resident (R) 45 reviewed for Resident Assessments. Findings include: Review of the ''Resident Assessment Instrument [RAI] Manual,'' October 2019 edition, indicated that a quarterly MDS assessment was to be completed at least every 92 days when a comprehensive assessment was not required. R45 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A review of the MDS assessments for R45 revealed the most recent quarterly MDS completed had an assessment reference date (ARD) of 09/23/22. An interview and electronic medical record review was conducted with the MDS Coordinator on 02/03/23 at 5:37 PM. The MDS Coordinator confirmed R45's quarterly last quarterly MDS was on 09/23/22. The MDS Coordinator stated he was responsible for timely completion of MDS and that he had missed R45's quarterly MDS and it was late.…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-02-03 · tag F0645 — isolated
    PASARR 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 review of the facility policy, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to follow the Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) process for individuals prior to admission to the facility by failing to complete Level I screening for 2 of 2 residents (Resident (R)11 and R71) reviewed for PASARR. Findings include: Review of facility's policy title PASSR Documentation Policy dated 04/2022 revealed . GENERAL GUIDELINES FOR PASARR: PASARR requires that: All applicants to a Medicaid-certified nursing facility are evaluated for mental illness A. and or intellectual disability, prior to admission and, B. Offered the most appropriate setting for their needs which may be in the community, a nursing facility, or an acute care setting, and C. Receive necessary services in those settings to address any specific need related to the diagnosis of mental illness or intellectual disability. 1. Review of R11's admission record located in the Profile tab of the electronic medical record (EMR), revealed…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-02-03 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolated
    Implement 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 facility policy review, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to a ensure an end date was added to an as needed (PRN) psychotropic medication order, a medication that alters the mood or thought process for 1of 5 residents (Resident (R) 46) reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility also failed to ensure a prescriber provided clinical rational for the continuation of a PRN medication beyond 14 days. This failure could have led to the resident remaining on a PRN psychotropic medication longer than necessary. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy dated 04/01/22, titled PSYCHOTROPIC DRUGS - USE OF revealed: A psychotropic drug is any drug that affects brain activities associated with mental processes and behavior. These drugs include, but are not limited to, drugs in the following categories: A. Anti-psychotic. B. Anti-depressant. C. Anti-anxiety, and D. Hypnotic. Further review of the policy revealed: D. PRN orders for psychotropic drugs are limited to 14 days. Except as…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-02-03 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on review of facility policy, record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure that intravenous (IV, medication given through the vein) fluids administered were labeled with the date, time, and initials of the person who hung them according to facility policy for 1 resident observed on IV fluids (Resident (R)16). Findings include: Review of the facility's police number 6.4 titled Medication Labeling revised on 04/01/22 revealed, 1. The Facility shall ensure that the pharmacy provider labels medications dispensed in accordance with State and Federal regulations. 2. The Facility shall ensure that all medications are labeled appropriately. Further review of the policy revealed, .8. Nursing should ensure that infusion therapy labels include the medication name, volume, infusion rate, name and quantity of each additive, date of preparation, initials of compounder, date and time of administration, initials of person administering the medication, ancillary labeling and expiration date. Review of R16's physician orders located in the electronic medical record…

    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.

“Disputed” is CMS’s own flag, not our reading: the CMS deficiency file records whether the home has formally contested a citation, and we reproduce that. IDR is Informal Dispute Resolution, run by the state survey agency that wrote the citation; IIDR is Independent Informal Dispute Resolution, a separate process before an outside entity, available when CMS has proposed a civil money penalty. They are different processes and we mark them differently. Two things to hold at once. A disputed citation is still a citation — it was written by a surveyor, it stands on the record unless and until it is changed, and we neither hide it nor discount it. And we cannot tell you how the dispute came out: CMS publishes that a citation is under dispute, not the outcome, so a tag marked here may since have been upheld, reduced, or deleted, and an unmarked tag may have been disputed and resolved before this file was cut. Ask the home what it disputed and why — it is entitled to tell you, and the answer is often the most informative thing on this page.

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

$27,147 in federal fines across 3 penalties.

  • $13,520 — penalty dated 2026-01-23
  • $6,813 — penalty dated 2024-07-18
  • $6,814 — penalty dated 2024-07-18

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 FUNDAMENTAL HEALTHCARE — 66 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 1 of 52.4-1.4 vs chain
Health inspection 2 of 52.5-0.5 vs chain
Staffing 1 of 52.2-1.2 vs chain
Quality measures 2 of 53.4-1.4 vs chain
The other 65 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.4★, per CMS)
1 of 5Avir at MemorialDenison, TX 1 of 5Bennettsville Health And Rehabilitation CenterBennettsville, SC 1 of 5Calhoun Convalescent CenterSaint Matthews, SC 1 of 5Corinth Rehabilitation Suites on the ParkwayCorinth, TX 1 of 5Forest Haven Nursing And Rehabilitation CtrCatonsville, MD 1 of 5Julia Manor Nursing And Rehabilitation CenterHagerstown, MD 1 of 5Magnolia Manor - GreenwoodGreenwood, SC 1 of 5Magnolia Manor - InmanInman, SC 1 of 5Magnolia Manor - Rock HillRock Hill, SC 1 of 5Northampton Manor Nursing And Rehabilitation CenteFrederick, MD 1 of 5Oakbrook Health And Rehabilitation CenterSummerville, SC 1 of 5Oakland Nursing & Rehabilitation CenterOakland, MD 1 of 5Physical Rehabilitation And Wellness Center Of SpaSpartanburg, SC 1 of 5Riverside Health and RehabCharleston, SC 1 of 5San Gabriel Rehabilitation and Care CenterRound Rock, TX 1 of 5Springdale Healthcare CenterCamden, SC 2 of 5Berlin Nursing And Rehabilitation CenterBerlin, MD 2 of 5Bremond Nursing and Rehabilitation CenterBremond, TX 2 of 5Fairfield Nursing & Rehabilitation CenterCrownsville, MD 2 of 5Faith Healthcare CenterFlorence, SC 2 of 5Falcon Ridge RehabilitationHutto, TX 2 of 5Hillside Heights Rehabilitation SuitesAmarillo, TX 2 of 5Horizon Health And Rehabilitation CenterLas Vegas, NV 2 of 5Lancaster Health and RehabilitationLancaster, SC 2 of 5Las Ventanas De SocorroSocorro, TX 2 of 5Magnolia Manor - GreenvilleGreenville, SC 2 of 5Midlands Health & Rehabilitation CenterColumbia, SC 2 of 5Mira Vista CourtFort Worth, TX 2 of 5Moran Nursing And Rehabilitation CenterWesternport, MD 2 of 5North Las Vegas Care CenterNorth las Vegas, NV 2 of 5Pavilion at Glacier ValleySlinger, WI 2 of 5Sandy Lake Rehabilitation And Care CenterCoppell, TX 2 of 5Southpointe Healthcare and RehabilitationGreenville, SC 2 of 5Spanish Hills Wellness SuitesLas Vegas, NV 2 of 5Terra Bella Health and Wellness SuitesHouston, TX 2 of 5The Pavilion At CreekwoodMansfield, TX 2 of 5Villa Rosa Nursing And Rehabilitation, LLCMitchellville, MD 3 of 5Bridgecrest Rehabilitation SuitesHouston, TX 3 of 5Crimson Heights Health & WellnessHumble, TX 3 of 5Devlin Manor Nursing And Rehabilitation CenterCumberland, MD

Showing 40 of 65; lowest-rated first.

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

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
THI OF SOUTH CAROLINA, LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 08/30/2003
BLANKENSHIP, JEANETTEIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 05/30/2019

CMS files one row per role, so the 3 rows in the source record cover these 2 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

$6.9M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-9.3%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.3M
Related-party expense18% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 78%Medicare 6%Other / private 15%

About 78% 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 $1.3M 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

$259per resident / day
operating cost
$7,875per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$237per 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 425303. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-08-26, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

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

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

What to do next