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

Life Care Center Of Charleston

2600 Elms Plantation Blvd, N Charleston, SC 29406 · For profit - Corporation · 148 certified beds · (843) 764-3500 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citation — no harm found (F0609) — cited May 2023Resident-funds citation (F0568)1 immediate-jeopardy citation1 immediate-jeopardy citation CMS recorded as corrected before the inspection ended (past non-compliance)$24,247 in federal fines
Insights

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

In its favor
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • 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 a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0568)
  • inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
  • inspectors recorded 1 serious finding 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 $24,247 in federal fines (most recent 2024-12-20)
  • its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
  • about 26% 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.

3/5
CMS overall
3 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 2 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 3 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 5 of 5

Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 3 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
★★★ 3/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
2671 Elms Plantation Blvd · (843) 797-6800 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
8995 University Blvd · (843) 414-0710 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
8780 Rivers Ave · (843) 764-3039 · Call to confirm hours
Park
8888 University Blvd · (843) 572-7275 · 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
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 4 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 4 to 3 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 rating3★
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 increased8.6%11.9%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight5.5%6.3%5.4%typical
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.2%0.6%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection1.0%1.3%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.3%3.1%6.5%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury2.8%3.2%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened8.4%12.7%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication21.0%21.0%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine80.5%90.6%95.3%worse
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers3.8%5.1%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control21.0%16.7%21.2%typical
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table5.2%15.3%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication1.3%1.5%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine40.8%78.0%79.4%worse
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission27.4%24.3%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit13.6%13.9%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.472.041.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.141.841.80better

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.

62.0% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 430 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

62.0%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
11.1%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
82.7%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.68U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.29hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.28hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.11hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 82.7% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 98 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.68 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 91% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 8% 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 SNF62.0%CMS range 56.6–65.851.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF11.1%CMS range 8.6–13.310.7%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 discharge82.7%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge78.6%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge79.6%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay2.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened2.5%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization6.5%CMS range 4.2–8.77.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.131.02Oct 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

0.44
RN hours/ resident / day
1.05
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.05
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.54
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.46
RN hoursweekends
42.7%
Total nursing turnover
53.3%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 148 beds and averages 117.2 residents a day — about 79% occupied, or roughly 31 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.54 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.44 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.05 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 3.10 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.72 on weekdays — 17% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.44 to 0.46 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 43% 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

4
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-01-08)
6
at the previous standard inspection (2024-12-20)

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.

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

  • Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2024-12-20 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to provide proper supervision for Resident (R)97, resulting in R97 eloping from the facility. Specifically, a resident pulled a fire alarm, resulting in R97 evacuating the facility alone, without staff knowledge. This resulted in R97 falling, while in the facility's unsecured courtyard, and suffering a fractured clavical. On 12/19/24 at 12:45 PM, the survey team provided the Administrator with a copy of the CMS Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) Template and informed the facility IJ existed as of 10/05/24. The IJ was related to 42 CFR 483.25 - Quality of Care. On 12/19/24 at 5:00 PM, the facility provided an acceptable IJ Removal Plan. On 12/20/24, the survey team, validated the facility's corrective actions and removed the IJ, as of 12/20/24. The facility remained out of compliance at F689 at a lower scope and severity of D. An extended survey was conducted in conjunction with the Recertification Survey for non-compliance at F689, constituting…

    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
  • Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2023-09-01 · 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 review of facility policy, record review and interviews, the facility failed to prevent accidents/hazards for 1 of 3 Residents (R)1 reviewed. Specifically, on 8/30/23, R1 had a successful elopement from the facility. R1 was placed at an increased risk of serious harm with the potential of being struck by a vehicle and/or suffering a heat related illness. On 08/31/23 at 3:35 PM the State Agency (SA) determined that the facility's non-compliance with one or more federal health, safety, and/or quality regulations has caused or was likely to cause serious injury, serious harm, serious impairment, or death. On 08/31/23 at 3:35 PM, the Administrator was notified that the failure to protect Resident (R)1 from having a successful elopement from the facility constituted Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) at F689. On 08/31/23 at 3:35 PM, the survey team provided the Administrator with a copy of the CMS Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) Template and informed the facility IJ existed as of 08/30/23. The IJ was related to 42 CFR 483.25…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · F2026-01-08 · tag F0568 — widespread
    Properly hold, secure, and manage each resident's personal money which is deposited with the nursing home.
    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 a review of facility policy, observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to send quarterly statements to the resident and the resident's representative for Residents (R)42, R78, R118, R101, and R120.Findings include:Review of the facility's policy titled, Personal Needs Account, revised 12/15/16, revealed, All residents are eligible, but not required, to participate in the personal needs account. This allows the resident to place money in an interest-bearing checking account, which they can access for personal needs.Procedure:5. The resident will receive an account summary on a quarterly basis or at more frequent intervals at his/her request.Review of R42's electronic medical record (EMR) revealed R42 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of an undefined Minimum Data Set (MDS) revealed R42's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 of 15, indicating normal cognitive function.During an interview on 01/06/2026 at 01:15 PM, R42 stated, I do not have or receive 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-01-08 · tag F0637 — isolated
    Assess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
    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 initiate a Significant Change of Status Minimum Data Set (MDS) to reflect Resident (R)88's election for Hospice Services, for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for Hospice.Findings include:Review of the facility policy titled Resident Assessment Instrument and Care Plan Development with a reviewed date of 08/29/25, documented, Procedure The Resident Assessment Instrument is composed of the MDS, Care Area Assessments, and Utilization Guidelines . 2. MDS assessments are completed at a minimum upon admission, quarterly, annually, and with a significant change in patient status . 4. The Care Area Process begins with the Care Area Triggers are completed with the admission MDS, annual MDS, and with a significant change in patient status assessment. 5. The Care Area Triggers are derived from the information coded on the MDS that identify patients who have or at risk for developing specific functional problems that require further…

    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 · D2026-01-08 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the facility policy, record review, observations, and staff interviews, the facility failed to identify, assess, and implement appropriate care-planned interventions to address 1 of 1 resident's known behavior of manipulating prescribed oxygen flow rates. This failure placed the resident at risk for receiving oxygen inconsistent with physician orders, and increased the risk for potential respiratory complications, including but not limited to oxygen toxicity or masking of changes in the resident's condition. Findings include:Record review of the Facility Policy titled, Oxygen Administration (Infection Control, Safety, & Storage last revised on 09/30/2025 and reviewed on 09/24/2024 revealed The facility must ensure that a resident who needs respiratory care, including tracheostomy care and tracheal suctioning, is provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, the resident's goals and preferences, and 483.65 of this…

    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 · D2026-01-08 · tag F0691 — failed to provide colostomy / ostomy care — isolated
    Provide appropriate colostomy, urostomy, or ileostomy care/services for a resident who requires such services.
    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's policy, observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure ostomy care was provided in accordance with professional standards, as no physician order for ostomy care was in place for 1 of 1 resident.Findings Include: Review of the policy titled, Colostomy and Ileostomy Care last revised on 09/20/2021 and reviewed on 09/04/2025 revealed on page 1 of 12 that, A physician's order will be obtained for ostomy care to include specific physician preference regarding appliance, skin barrier, and skin care. Record review of R129's Face Sheet revealed he was admitted on [DATE] with the diagnoses including but not limited to congestive heart failure, atrial fibrillation, dementia, insomnia, hyperlipidemia, colostomy, and need for assistance with personal care. Record review of R129's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 01/02/2026 revealed that R129 has the Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 12 out of 15, which…

    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 · F2024-12-20 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — widespread
    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 the facility policy, observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure expired, outdated or discontinued medications were removed and not stored with resident medications in use in 3 of 5 medication carts and 1 of 1 treatment carts. The facility additionally failed to ensure a medication cart was locked, and medications were not left on top of the med cart unattended on Morning Star Unit, medication cart #2. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Drug Storage Guide, states under, Medication Cart Check, The MAR/EMR are covered when unattended. The medication care is locked when unattended. Expired controlled substances are not present. The drug storage guide did not include expired medications and biologicals, or medications unsecured and on the top of the med cart. The facility's drug storage guide did not mention the storing of discontinued medications in the medication cart. An observation on 12/17/2024 at 10:32 AM of the medication cart 2 on the Dayspring Unit revealed: Risperidone 1 milligam (mg), 20 tabs with Lot #8198-4007 were discontinued…

    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 · Fcited before2024-12-20 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Findings include: Review of the facility's policy Hand Hygiene, revised 06/13/2023 showed Procedure: 2. Associates perform hand hygiene (even if gloves are used) in the following situations. a. Before and after contact with a resident; c. After contact with objects and surfaces in the resident's environment; During a dining observation on the Pebble Creek unit on 12/17/24 at 12:09 PM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN)7 came from behind the desk and pulled a tray from the food cart without performing proper hand hygiene. LPN7 placed the tray on top of the food cart. While speaking with a resident representative, LPN7 touched her face, the hand rail, and her hair before removing the tray from the top of the food cart and putting the tray back inside the cart. During further observation on 12/17/24 at 12:12 PM, LPN3 was observed pulling the food cart down hall to room [ROOM NUMBER] while touching her hair. She then opened the food cart and pulled another tray from the cart and took the tray to a resident room 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 · E2024-12-20 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — pattern
    Ensure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on the facility policy, observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure a medication administration error rate of less than 5 percent to include 4 of out 26 opportunities for error. The facility additionally failed to ensure an ordered medication for Resident (R)39 was administered timely. The medication administration error rate is 15.38 percent. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Insulin Pen Administration, revised 08/30/2023 and reviewed 09/17/2024, states: Policy: The facility will ensure residents with orders for insulin administration through the use of a pen delivery device is performed in accordance with current standards or practice with manufacturer's guidance. Procedure: 4. The insulin pen should be primed prior to each use (in accordance with manufacturer's guidelines) to prevent the collection of air in the insulin reservoir. a. General guidance for priming an insulin pen in the absence of manufacturer's guidance; i. Dial 2 units by turning the dose selector clockwise. ii. With the needle pointing up, push the plunger, and watch 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-12-20 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — pattern
    Ensure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on the facility policy, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the proper priming of insulin pens, and correct administration on insulin via an insulin pen, therefore could not ensure 3 of 3 residents (R) received the correct dosage of insulin. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Insulin Pen Administration, revised 08/30/2023 and reviewed 09/17/2024, states: Policy: The facility will ensure residents with orders for insulin administration through the use of a pen delivery device is performed in accordance with current standards or practice with manufacturer's guidance. Procedure: 4. The insulin pen should be primed prior to each use (in accordance with manufacturer's guidelines) to prevent the collection of air in the insulin reservoir. a. General guidance for priming an insulin pen in the absence of manufacturer's guidance; i. Dial 2 units by turning the dose selector clockwise. ii. With the needle pointing up, push the plunger, and watch to see that at least one drop of insulin appears on the tip of the needle. If not, repeat 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-12-20 · tag F0557 — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to be treated with respect and dignity and to retain and use personal possessions.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on the facility policy, observations, record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to maintain dignity for Resident (R)39 during the administration of an insulin injection for 1 of 3 residents observed receiving an insulin injection. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Dignity, issued 05/06/2019 and reviewed 09/26/2024 states: Policy, Each resident has the right to be treated with dignity and respect. Interactions and activities with residents by staff, temporary agency staff, or volunteers must focus on maintaining and enhancing the resident's self esteem, self-worth, and incorporating the resident's goals, preferences, and choices. Staff must respect the resident's individuality as well as, honor and value their input. Respect and Dignity. The resident has a right to be treated with respect and dignity. The facility admitted R39 on 10/08/2024 with diagnoses including, but not limited to diabetes mellitus type 2 without complications, morbid obesity, and long term use of insulin. During an observation on 12/18/2024 at 08:00 AM of insulin…

    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 · Ecited before2023-05-10 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure that food was protected from contamination during delivery to resident rooms. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure that food was covered during delivery to 1 (Morning Star Unit) of 3 nursing units. This deficient practice has the potential to affect 31 residents who occasionally or regularly ate in their rooms on the Morning Star Unit. Findings include: A review of the facility policy, Resident Dining Services, revised 04/26/2023, revealed, When meals are assembled in the kitchen and then delivered to residents' rooms or dining areas to be distributed, covering foods is appropriate, either individually or in a mobile food cart. The policy further indicated, Flatware will be wrapped, and food, desserts, salads, and beverages will be covered before transported throughout the facility. Observation of the lunch meal service on 05/08/2023 at 1:02 PM, revealed the covered meal tray delivery cart parked near the Morning…

    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 · D2023-05-10 · 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 record review, document review, facility policy review, and interviews, the facility failed to timely report an allegation of abuse for 1 (Resident (R)217) of 1 resident reviewed for abuse. Findings include: Review of the policy, Abuse-Reporting and Response - Suspicion of a Crime, dated 10/04/2022, indicated, Policy - The facility will ensure reporting reasonable suspicion of crimes against a resident or individual receiving care from the facility within prescribed timeframes to the appropriate entities, consistent with Section 1150B of the Elder Justice Act. The policy specified, Each covered individual shall repot immediately, but not later than 2 hours after forming the suspicion, if the events that cause the suspicion result in serious bodily injury, or not later than 24 hours if the events that cause the suspicion do not result in serious bodily injury. A review of R217's admission Record revealed the facility admitted the resident on 04/26/23 with diagnoses to include fracture of the upper and lower end of the left fibula, displaced comminuted fracture of the shaft…

    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

“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

$24,247 in federal fines across 2 penalties.

  • $16,801 — penalty dated 2024-12-20
  • $7,446 — penalty dated 2023-09-01

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 LIFE CARE CENTERS OF AMERICA — 194 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 3 of 53.4-0.4 vs chain
Health inspection 2 of 52.8-0.8 vs chain
Staffing 3 of 53.3-0.3 vs chain
Quality measures 5 of 54.5+0.5 vs chain
The other 193 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.4★, per CMS)
1 of 5Garden Terrace At Overland ParkOverland Park, KS 1 of 5Hammond-Whiting Care CenterWhiting, IN 1 of 5Life Care Center Of AndoverAndover, KS 1 of 5Life Care Center Of Cape GirardeauCape Girardeau, MO 1 of 5Life Care Center Of GrayGray, TN 1 of 5Life Care Center Of HixsonHixson, TN 1 of 5Life Care Center Of Mount VernonMount Vernon, WA 1 of 5Life Care Center Of RenoReno, NV 1 of 5Life Care Center Of Sierra VistaSierra Vista, AZ 1 of 5Life Care Center Of The WillowsValparaiso, IN 1 of 5Life Care Center Of TucsonTucson, AZ 1 of 5Life Care Center of Coeur d'AleneCoeur d'Alene, ID 1 of 5Life Care Center of ElkhornElkhorn, NE 1 of 5Life Care Center of Hilton HeadHilton Head Island, SC 1 of 5Life Care Center of OmahaOmaha, NE 1 of 5Life Care Center of PlainwellPlainwell, MI 1 of 5Life Care Ctr Of LawrencevilleLawrenceville, GA 1 of 5Rensselaer Care CenterRensselaer, IN 2 of 5Canon Lodge Care CenterCanon City, CO 2 of 5Darcy Hall Of Life CareWest Palm Beach, FL 2 of 5Desert Cove Nursing CenterChandler, AZ 2 of 5Evergreen Nursing HomeAlamosa, CO 2 of 5Garden Terrace Healthcare Center of HoustonHouston, TX 2 of 5Hallmark ManorFederal Way, WA 2 of 5Lane House, TheCrawfordsville, IN 2 of 5Life Care Center Of Altamonte SpringsAltamonte Springs, FL 2 of 5Life Care Center Of AthensAthens, TN 2 of 5Life Care Center Of BridgetonBridgeton, MO 2 of 5Life Care Center Of BrookfieldBrookfield, MO 2 of 5Life Care Center Of ClevelandCleveland, TN 2 of 5Life Care Center Of ColumbiaColumbia, SC 2 of 5Life Care Center Of Coos BayCoos Bay, OR 2 of 5Life Care Center Of Federal WayFederal Way, WA 2 of 5Life Care Center Of GrandviewGrandview, MO 2 of 5Life Care Center Of KirklandKirkland, WA 2 of 5Life Care Center Of Merrimack ValleyBillerica, MA 2 of 5Life Care Center Of Morgan CountyWartburg, TN 2 of 5Life Care Center Of PuyallupPuyallup, WA 2 of 5Life Care Center Of Red BankChattanooga, TN 2 of 5Life Care Center Of South Las VegasLas Vegas, NV

Showing 40 of 193; 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 / managerTypeRoleSince
DEVELOPERS INVESTMENT COMPANY INCOrganizationDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 08/10/2004
PRESTON, FORRESTIndividualINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/10/2004
LEWIS, COLLINIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/05/2025
SAUNDERS, SHARIIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 06/22/2018
SOLOMON, JENNIFERIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 05/01/2019
CROSS, CINDYIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 10/22/2004
HENRY, TERRYIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 10/22/2004
LAY, LISAIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 02/09/2018
SWANKER, RICHARDIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 04/01/2011
THURMOND, JOANIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 10/22/2004
CHARLESTON MEDICAL INVESTORS, LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 12/01/2004
LIFE CARE CENTERS OF AMERICA, INC.OrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/05/2025
FLETCHER, TODDIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 12/13/2024
HANNA, DONALDIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/27/2025
PRESTON, AUBREYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 12/13/2024
ZIEGLER, JAMESIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 12/13/2024

CMS files one row per role, so the 25 rows in the source record cover these 16 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

3 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.

$14.3M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+4.5%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$3.6M
Related-party expense26% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 47%Medicare 26%Other / private 28%

This home reported $3.6M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 26% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

$343per resident / day
operating cost
$10,419per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$359per 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 425332. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-08, 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