Riverview Post Acute
111 E Pemberton Street, Ashland City, TN 37015 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 95 certified beds · (615) 792-9154 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 2 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 3 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 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.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 18.1% | 14.0% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 5.5% | 6.1% | 5.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.7% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 1.8% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 13.8% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 3.3% | 3.4% | 3.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 27.4% | 17.2% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 33.5% | 31.7% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 98.5% | 94.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 4.6% | 5.0% | 4.7% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 19.1% | 20.0% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 24.8% | 16.8% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 2.1% | 1.7% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 95.5% | 79.8% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 27.3% | 22.6% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 18.3% | 11.2% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.57 | 1.67 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 3.15 | 1.56 | 1.80 | worse |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
§ 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.
54.5% 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 53 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.36 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 61% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 19% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 54.5%CMS range 41.9–64.8 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 11.1%CMS range 7.5–16.3 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 10.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 6.6%CMS range 3.6–11.6 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.09 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 95 beds and averages 82.7 residents a day — about 87% occupied, or roughly 12 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 3.98 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.28 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.39 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 3.41 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.21 on weekdays — 19% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.29 to 0.27 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 53% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are unchanged from the previous inspection. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
13 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Potential for harm · F2026-01-14 · tag F0887 — widespreadEducate residents and staff on COVID-19 vaccination, offer the COVID-19 vaccine to eligible residents and staff after education, and properly document each resident and staff member's vaccination status.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on policy review, employee list review, and interview, the facility failed to offer COVID-19 vaccinations to employees after February 2025, which had the potential to affect 76 of 76 residents that were residing in the facility. The findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Employee Immunization and Vaccination Status, dated January 2024, revealed .Employees are offered or provided with immunization/vaccinations per state or local agency policies/regulations. Review of the employee list dated 1/14/2026 revealed 45 employees were hired from 2/2025 to 1/14/2026. The facility was unable to provide documentation that employees hired from 2/2025 to 1/14/2026 were offered the COVID vaccine. During an interview on 1/14/2026 at 8:30 AM, the Infection Control Preventionist (ICP) was asked if the COVID vaccine was offered to staff. The ICP stated, We do not offer the COVID vaccine to employees. We only educate them if a new vaccine is available .the vaccine was no longer offered to staff beginning in February 2025 .
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-14 · tag F0582 — isolatedGive residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy review, medical record review, and interview, the facility failed to provide Advance Beneficiary Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage for 3 of 3 (Resident #20, #82, and #83) sampled residents reviewed for Advanced Beneficiary Notice. The findings include: 1. Review of the facility policy titled, Medicare Advance Beneficiary and Medicare Non-Coverage Notices, dated 9/2024, revealed .A resident (who is a Medicare beneficiary) is informed in advance and in writing when Medicare payment denial or change in coverage is likely.Written notices of the likelihood of Medicare payment denial are provided to the resident/beneficiary.as soon as the facility makes the assessment that Medicare payment certainly or probably will not be made and before the item of service is furnished.far enough in advance of an event.so that the beneficiary can make a rational, informed decision without undue pressure. 2. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #20 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-14 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure 2 of 4 (Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) B and LPN C) nurses administered medications with a medication error rate of less than 5 percent (%). A total of 2 errors were observed out of 25 opportunities, resulting in a medication error rate of 8%. The findings include: 1. Review of facility policy titled, Medication Administration, .Residents shall receive medications according to safe standards of practice.Medications are prepared and administered according to the following: right medication, right dose, right time, right person, right route, right position, right texture and right documentation.Prior to administration, the medication and dosage schedule on the resident's MAR (medication administration record) is compared with the medication label. If the label and MAR are different, stop and compare to physician's orders. Seek further clarification as needed. 2. Review of the medical record 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-14 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on facility policy review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were properly stored and secured when 1 of 3 (Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) B left a medication cart unsecured and unattended. The findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Storage of Medications, dated 11/2020, revealed .The facility stores all drugs and biologicals in a safe, secure, and orderly manner.Drugs and biologicals used in the facility are stored in locked compartments.Only persons authorized to prepare and administer medications have access to locked medications.Compartment (including, but not limited to, drawers, cabinets, rooms, refrigerators, carts, and boxes) containing drugs and biologicals are locked when not in use. Unlocked medication carts are not left unattended. Review of the facility policy titled, Medication Administration, dated 7/1/2025, revealed .The medication cart should always be locked when not attended by nurse. During an observation and interview on the 600 Hall on 1/13/2026 at 1:18 PM, LPN B walked away from the 600 Hall F/Bottom…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2021-06-16 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on policy review, observation and interview, 2 of 8 staff members (Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #1 and #2) failed to distribute and serve food in a sanitary manner during dining when they did not perform hand hygiene between serving residents and after touching contaminated surfaces. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Hand Hygiene Policy, revised 4/14/2020, revealed .Hand washing/hand hygiene is generally considered the most important single procedure for preventing healthcare-associated infections .If hands are not visibly soiled, use an alcohol-based hand rub . Review of the facility's policy titled, Infection Prevention and Control Program, revised 4/10/2021, revealed .Hand Hygiene Protocol .All staff shall perform hand hygien [hygiene] when coming on duty, between resident contacts, after handling contaminated objects, after PPE [Personal Protective Equipment: isolation gowns, gloves, masks, shields] removal .Staff shall perform hand hygiene before and after performing resident care procedures . Observation outside of the resident's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2021-06-16 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on policy review, observation and interview, the facility failed to maintain or enhance resident dignity and respect when 1 of 7 staff members (Certified Nurse Assistant (CNA) #3) was standing over a resident (Resident #14) to assist with their meal. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Promoting/Maintaining Resident Dignity During Mealtimes, with an effective date of 6/16/2021, revealed that staff will be seated to assist with meals. Observation in the resident's room on 6/15/2021 at 8:12 AM, revealed CNA #3 was standing to assist Resident #14 with their meal. During an interview on 6/16/2021 at 5:48 PM, the Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed staff should be seated to assist residents with their meals.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-06-16 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on policy review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were properly stored and secured in 1 of 6 medication storage areas (A Hall Medication Cart) when a medication cart was unlocked and unattended and unattended medications were on top of the cart. The finding's include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Medication Storage, updated 6/2012, revealed .It is the responsibility of the facility to keep the medication cart locked and secure at all times when not in use .Medications .CANNOT be stored on top of the medication cart. All safety measures must be taken to protect the residents from accessing medications and other objects that could potentially harm the resident or others . Observation of the A Hall Medication Cart outside of room [ROOM NUMBER] on 6/15/2021 at 8:55 AM, revealed an unlocked and unattended medication cart. Observation of the A Hall Medication Cart outside of room [ROOM NUMBER] on 6/15/2021 at 9:03 AM, revealed umeclidinium-vilanterol aerosol…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-06-16 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on policy review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure practices to prevent the potential spread of infection were maintained when staff failed to ensure 1 of 1 newly admitted residents (Resident #202) was placed in isolation on admission, when 1 of 8 staff members (Certified Nursing Assistant #1) failed to properly dispose of disposable Personal Protective Equipment, and when 2 of 2 isolation rooms (Isolation room [ROOM NUMBER] and Isolation room [ROOM NUMBER]) had trash overflowing and was spilling onto the floor. The findings include: Review of the facility's undated policy titled, New Admissions/LOA [Leave of Absence] Instructions, revealed .New admissions .will be placed in yellow zone [isolation] for at least 14 days to continue to monitor for s/s [signs and symptoms] of COVID-19. However if a resident has been fully vaccinated for COVID-19 .they do not have to be placed in isolation on the yellow zone . Review of the medical record, revealed Resident #202…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-05-21 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on policy review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to notify the physician for 2 of 2 (Resident #22 and #53) sampled residents reviewed for pressure ulcers and bowel function. The findings include: 1. Medical record review revealed Resident #22 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Demyelinating Disease, Heart Failure, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Pressure Ulcer Left Buttock, and Retention of Urine. The Admit/Readmit Screener dated 4/30/19 documented, .Right buttock .Pressure .Left buttock .Pressure . The physician's orders dated 5/8/19 documented, .Barrier cream to BIL [bilateral] buttocks r/t [related to] pressure injury every shift for pressure injury .Order Date .4/30/2019 . Observations in Resident #22's room on 5/19/19 at 10:39 AM, revealed a half dollar size open area to her right buttock. Thyere was no documentation in the medical record th physician had been notified of this wound. Telephone interview with the Wound Care Doctor on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-05-21 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
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 policy review, medical record review, and interview the facility failed to administer treatment to restore normal bowel function for 1 of 1 (Resident #53) sampled residents reviewed for bowel function. The findings include: The facility's Bowel Policy . dated 12/30/11 documented, .beginning of the 3rd day of no B.M [bowel movement] Administer miralax 17 gram, mix with prune juice or beverage of choice, wait 4 hours, if no bowel movement repeat one time, wait 2 hours. Apply one ducalox [Dulcolax] sup [suppository] rectally, wait 2 hours. Administer fleets enema one rectally, wait 2 hours . Medical record review revealed Resident #53 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Heart Failure, Neuromuscular Dysfunction, Diabetic Mellitus, Venous Insufficiency, Chronic Pain, and Constipation. The Care Plan dated 1/29/19 documented, .Problem .I have the potential for constipation r/t [related to] Decreased mobility, Pain med [medication] use .Interventions .receive laxatives and stool softeners…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-05-21 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on policy review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to identify and assess 1 of 3 (Resident #22) sampled residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The findings include: The facility's Wound Care policy dated 12/1/05 documented, .Document site, size, description of site, condition of skin around site, treatment started and who the pressure ulcer was reported to . The Facility's Standing Orders policy dated 5/30/18 documented, .Barrier Cream or Calmoseptine for reddened or excoriated skin .follow skin protocol for stg [stage] 1-4 pressure ulcers . Medical record review revealed Resident #22 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Demyelinating Disease, Heart Failure, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Pressure Ulcer Left Buttock and Retention of Urine. The Admit/Readmit Screener dated 4/30/19 documented, .Right buttock .Pressure .Left buttock .Pressure . The physician's orders dated 5/8/19 documented, .Barrier cream to BIL [bilateral] buttocks r/t…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-05-21 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to follow interventions for the prevention of accidents for 1 of 2 (Resident #7) sampled residents reviewed for accidents. The findings include: Medical record review revealed Resident #7 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Immune Thrombocytopenic Purpura, Visual Loss Both Eyes, Macular Degeneration, Hearing Loss, Dementia, Hypertension, Diabetes, Depression, Anxiety, Anemia, Acquired Absence of Right Leg Above Knee, and Osteoporosis. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 13, which indicated no cognitive impairment, no behaviors, and was totally dependent on staff for transfers. The Care Plan dated 11/13/17, and last reviewed 4/28/19, documented, .risk for weakness, fatigue, malaise, lethargy r/t [related to] Anemia .Interventions .If I experience any .bruising, or excessive bleeding alert my CN [Charge Nurse]/MD [Medical Doctor] .have…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2019-05-21 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on policy review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure practices to prevent the potential spread of infection were maintained when 1 of 1 (Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #1) staff member failed to perform hand hygiene during indwelling catheter care. The findings include: The facility's undated Standard and Precaution Policy documented, .Hand Hygiene .before applying and after removing personal protective equipment, including gloves .before and after handling clean or soiled .linens . Medical record review revealed Resident #22 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Demyelinating Disease, Heart Failure, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Pressure Ulcer Left Buttock and Retention of Urine. The Physician's Orders dated 4/30/19 documented, .Foley cath [catheter] care q [every] shift .as needed . Observations in Resident #22's room on 5/21/19 at 9:01 AM, revealed CNA #1 gathered supplies, donned gloves, and completed indwelling catheter care.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HIGHTOWER, JAMES | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE OFFICER | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 10/01/2012 |
| HIGHTOWER, PATRICIA | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE OFFICER | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 10/01/2012 |
| HIGHTOWER, TODD | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 10/01/2012 |
| HEALTHMARK SERVICES INC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 09/01/2015 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 8 rows in the source record cover these 4 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 74% 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. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in TN
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 Tennessee Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 445316. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-14, 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.