Calhoun Convalescent Center

Location & what’s nearby

Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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.

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.

51.1% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 41 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.14 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 10% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 26% 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 120 beds and averages 113.1 residents a day — about 94% occupied, or roughly 7 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.16 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.29 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.03 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 2.83 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.30 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.31 to 0.23 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

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

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

28 citations, most serious first. The 15 most serious are shown; the remaining 13 are one tap away and print in full.

• Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2026-03-30 · 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 the facility policy, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure that Resident (R)1 received appropriate supervision to prevent a successful elopement from the facility on 03/22/26.On 03/30/26 at 2:37 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 03/30/26 at 2:37 PM the survey team provided the Administrator with a copy of the CMS Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) Template, informing the facility IJ existed as of 03/22/26. The IJ was related to 42 CFR 483.25 - Free of Accident Hazards/Supervision/Devices. On 03/30/26 at 4:07 PM, the facility provided an acceptable IJ Removal Plan. The survey team validated the facility's corrective actions and determined the facility put forth due diligence in identifying and addressing the non-compliance. The SA is considering this at Past Non-Compliance 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
• Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2025-03-26 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to follow manufacturer's guidelines to ensure that blood glucose glucometers were sanitized/cleaned properly. On 03/25/25 at 12:10 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 03/25/25 at 12:15 PM, the Administrator was notified that the facility's failure to have systems in place to monitor for blood glucose glucometers constituted Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) at F880. On 03/26/25 at 3:00 PM, the facility provided an acceptable IJ Removal Plan. On 03/26/25 at 4:10 PM, the survey team validated the facility's corrective actions and removed the IJ. The facility remained out of compliance at F880 at a lower scope and severity of D. Findings include: Record review of facility policy titled Staff Education/Orientation Policies and Procedures Blood Glucose…

  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
• Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2024-06-14 · 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)1's elopement from the facility. On 06/14/24 at 1:28 PM, the Administrator was notified that the failure to properly supervise a resident, resulting in a successful elopement from the facility, constituted Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) at F689. On 06/14/24 at 1:28 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 06/11/24. The IJ was related to 42 CFR 483.25 - Quality of Care. On 06/14/24 at approximately 2:18 PM, the facility provided an acceptable IJ Removal Plan. The survey team validated the facility's corrective actions and determined the facility put forth good faith attempts to address the non-compliance. The survey team considers the IJ at Past Non-Compliance as of 06/12/24. An extended survey was conducted in conjunction with the Complaint Survey for non-compliance at…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
• Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2023-09-05 · 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 a review of the facility policy, record reviews, and interviews, the facility failed to protect 1 of 1 residents from sexual abuse. Resident (R)1 inappropriately touched R2 on 08/28/2023 at approximately 5:20 p.m. This was observed by staff members. On 09/01/2023 at 05:30 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 09/01/2023 at 05:30 pm, the survey team presented the Administrator with the Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) template, notifying her that the failure to protect R2 from sexual abuse by R1 constituted IJ at F600 with the start date of 08/28/2023. The facility presented an acceptable removal plan for F600 on 09/01/2023 via email. The SA returned to the facility on [DATE] to verify the removal of the IJ. Following a review of the facility's implementation plan, along with a review of audits, education, 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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Immediate jeopardy · J2023-09-05 · tag F0624 — isolated
  Prepare residents for a safe transfer or discharge from 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 interviews, record review, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to provide and document sufficient preparation and orientation to a resident to ensure safe and orderly discharge from the facility for 1 of 1 residents reviewed for discharge. Specifically, Resident (R)1, nor his representative was adequately prepared or informed of R1's discharge from the facility. On 09/01/23 at 5:30 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 09/01/23 at 5:30 PM, the survey team presented the Administrator with the Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) template, notifying her that the failure to ensure a proper and safe discharge for R1 constituted IJ at F624 with a start date of 08/29/23. The facility presented an acceptable removal plan for F624 on 09/01/23 via email. The survey team returned to the facility on [DATE] to verify…

  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 · F2026-02-24 · tag F0576 — widespread
  Ensure residents have reasonable access to and privacy in their use of communication methods.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on review of facility policy and interviews, the facility failed to ensure resident's received their mail in a timely manner and unopened. This deficient practice had the potential to effect all residents in the facility that received mail. Findings include: Review of the undated facility policy titled Mail Distribution documented, To ensure that each patient's/resident's personal mail (incoming and outgoing) is handled in a private and confidential manner. It is the Facility's policy to: 1. Distribute all incoming mail to the addressed patient/resident unopened and within the same day on which it was delivered to the Activity Department. Procedures: 1. The Activity Staff or Designated Staff or Volunteer will: A. Deliver personal mail to the patient's/resident's room within 24 hours of receipt. B. Deliver all mail unopened, unless otherwise directed by the patient/resident or his/her qualified legal representative. The resident's care plan will include an approach related to staff assisting a resident to open mail if it occurs on a regular basis. C. Provide 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-02-24 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
  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, observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure unlabeled, outdated and expired medications were removed from 4 of 4 medication carts, and not stored with the current medications in use for residents.Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, General Guidelines for Storage of Medication and Biologicals, states, 1. Medications and biologicals are stored safely, securely and properly following manufacturer's recommendations or those of the supplier. In accordance with State and Federal laws, the facility will store all drugs and biologicals in locked compartments under proper temperatures and other appropriate environmental controls to preserve their integrity. Procedures: . 5. Medications with manufacturer's expiration date expressed in month and year will expire on the last day of the month. (Unless a sooner expiration date has been placed on the package by the pharmacy). 10. Facility shall ensure that medications and biologicals are stored at the appropriate temperature, light, humidity according to manufacturer…

  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 · D2026-02-24 · tag F0636 — isolated
  Assess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 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 record review, facility policy review, and interview, the facility failed to perform Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) assessments every three months as ordered by the provider for 3 out of 3 residents reviewed for psychotropic medications (Resident (R)41, R92, R97). This failure to complete AIMS assessments as ordered put residents at risk for harm due to the potential of adverse effects from psychotropic medications not being recognized in a timely manner. Findings include:Review of the facility policy titled Medication Management with a revision date of 04/17/25, revealed, . 9. The facility will monitor and document the resident's response to psychotropic medication for efficacy and adverse consequences. Monitoring will include: . F. AIMS (Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale) testing should be completed as a baseline on admission or re-admission with an enduring antipsychotic medication, on initiation of an anti-psychotic medication, and at least every six months and with dosage changes.1.…

  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 · D2026-02-24 · 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 record review, facility policy review, and interview, the facility failed to complete a Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for Hospice care and services. Specifically, R92 began receiving Hospice care on 01/09/26, and a Significant Change MDS assessment was not completed as required. This failure had the potential for harm due to the Resident not being comprehensively assessed at the time of the significant change in her status. Findings include:Review of the facility policy titled Significant Change with a revision date of 05/05/23, revealed, Policy: 1. The nursing staff, as well as the interdisciplinary team, will evaluate the patient's/resident's change in status in accordance with the established guidelines from the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI). Procedures: 4. All residents that are referred to Hospice need to have a Significant Change MDS completed.Review of the facility policy titled Minimum Data Set (MDS) with a revision date of 09/28/23, 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 · Dcited before2026-02-24 · 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 record review, facility policy review, and interview, the facility failed to update the Care Plan for Resident (R)2, who changed from a Full Code status to a Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) status, for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for Hospice care and services. Specifically, R92 changed from a Full Code status to a DNR status on 11/24/25, and her Care Plan was not updated to reflect this change until 02/24/26. Findings include:Review of the facility policy titled Person-Centered Care Plan with a revision date of 06/09/23, revealed, . Procedures: . 3. The person-centered care plan is interdisciplinary and created to guide facility staff in providing treatment, care, and services necessary for the patient/resident to obtain and maintain the highest physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being possible. The plan is also used to promote patient/resident and family involvement in planning care.Review of R92's Face Sheet revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses including, but not limited 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 Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-24 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure Resident (R)7 and R37 were offered and/or assisted with hand hygiene prior to meal service for 2 of 2 residents observed during meal service. Findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled Infection Prevention and Control Policies and Procedures Subject: Hand Hygiene/Handwashing, indicated under the Procedures section that hand hygiene/handwashing is to be performed before eating and before preparing, distributing, handling, or serving food.Review of R7's electronic medical record (EMR) revealed R7 had an admission date of 08/12/25, with diagnoses including but not limited to, vascular dementia, muscle weakness, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder and dysphagia oropharyngeal phase.Review of R7's Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 02/06/26, revealed R7 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 99 out of 15, which indicates R7 was severely cognitively impaired. Further review of the MDS revealed R7 requires setup or clean-up assistance with eating.Review…

  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 · E2026-02-11 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — pattern
  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 review of the facility policy, record review and interview, the facility failed to report allegations of sexual abuse, to the State Agency (SA), involving Resident (R)1, R2 and R3, for 3 of 3 residents reviewed for allegations of sexual abuse.Findings include:Review of the facility policy titled, Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation, or Mistreatment states under, Component V. Reporting Response 1. All alleged violations concerning abuse, neglect, or misappropriation of property are reported verbally, immediately to the Facility Abuse Coordinator, the Administrator and to other officials in accordance with state law including the State Survey and Certification Agency. 2. An analysis is completed to determine what changes are needed, if appropriate, to prevent further occurrences. 3. Complete the Investigation Summary Log, maintained by the Administrator or his/her designee. 4. Employees always have the right to report allegations directly to the state agency for elder abuse prevention.Review of R1's Face Sheet…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-02-11 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to implement Care Plan interventions related to fall prevention for Resident (R)4, for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for falls.Findings include:Review of the facility policy titled, Fall Management with a revision date of 05/05/23 indicated, The facility will identify each patient/resident who is at risk of falls and will plan care and implement interventions to manage falls . (1) The Fall Risk Evaluation assists in identifying the appropriate preventative interventions that will be recorded on the patient/resident's care plan . (5) The care plan reflects individualized interventions that are reassessed and revised as needed. Review of R4's Face Sheet revealed R4 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses including but not limited to dementia, history of falling, diabetes mellitus, hypokalemia, chronic kidney disease, and urinary tract infection.Review of R4's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-03-26 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
  Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the facility policy, observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure medications and biological were not expired for 2 of 2 units reviewed. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Medication Storage last revised [DATE] revealed, Policy: Medications and biologicals are stored safely, securely and properly following manufacturers recommendations or those of the supplier. Once any medication or biological package is opened, the facility should follow manufacturers guidelines with respect to expiration date of opened medications. An observation and interview on [DATE] at 9:25 AM of the medication room East Wing with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 4 revealed the following: One unopened bottle of Pink Bismuth Regular Strength 8 fluid ounces with an expiration date of 12/24, one Laboratory Vacutainer blue top with an expiration date of [DATE], two insulin Novolog pens with an expiration date of [DATE] and Lot number MZF3X25 and two boxes of Blood Culture Collection Kits with…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-03-26 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
  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, observation, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure a room was clean and sanitary for 1 of 1 Residents (R) 80 reviewed for environment. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Patient/Resident Room Cleaning/Bathroom Cleaning dated 03/06, revealed, This routine procedure will clean and disinfect patient/resident rooms and bathrooms thereby providing a clean, safe decontaminated environment for our patients/residents. Expected results, patient/resident rooms and bathrooms that are clean, sanitary odor free and safe. Record review of R80's facesheet revealed R80 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis that include but are not limited to: vascular dementia with anxiety, diabetes mellitus, hypertension and benign prostatic hyperplasia. Record review of R80's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 01/11/25 revealed a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) of 00, indicating he was non…

  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

“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.

Fines & penalties

$23,735 in federal fines across 2 penalties.

• $9,679 — penalty dated 2025-03-26
• $14,056 — penalty dated 2024-06-14

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 →

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

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.

About 77% 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 $519K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

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

Cost & finances

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in SC