Life Care Center Of Red Bank

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.

51.3% 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 123 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 79.0% 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 38 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 0.44 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 75% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 1% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. 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 148 beds and averages 83.9 residents a day — about 57% occupied, or roughly 64 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. 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 3.59 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.57 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.17 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 2.95 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.84 on weekdays — 23% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.62 to 0.44 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 61% 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 more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 2 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.

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.

24 citations, most serious first. The 15 most serious are shown; the remaining 9 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · G2024-02-29 · 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 facility policy review, facility procedure review, medical record review, facility investigation review, and interviews the facility failed to implement the comprehensive care plan for 1 resident (Resident #3) which resulted in actual Harm, of 5 residents reviewed for care plans for accidents. The facility was cited as past non-compliance and the facility is not required to submit a Plan of Correction for F-656. Non-compliance began on 9/26/2022 and ended on 8/28/2023. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Comprehensive Care Plans and Revisions, dated 3/2/2022, showed .Procedure .The facility should monitor the resident over time to help identify changes in the resident condition that may warrant an update to the person-centered plan of care. When these changes occur, the facility should review and update the plan of care to reflect the changes to care delivery .Additional interventions on existing problems . Review of a facility procedure titled, Transfer with a Mechanical Lift…

  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 · Past Non-Compliance
• Actual harm · Gcited before2024-02-29 · 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 facility policy review, facility procedure review, medical record review, review of facility investigation documentation, and interviews the facility failed to prevent falls with major injury for 1 resident (Resident #3) of 5 residents reviewed for accidents. The facility was cited as past non-compliance and the facility is not required to submit a Plan of Correction for F-689. Non-compliance began on 9/26/2022 and ended on 8/28/2023. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Fall Management, dated 4/7/2022, showed .Accident .Refers to any unexpected or unintentional incident, which results or may result in injury or illness to a resident .Avoidable Accident .an accident occurred because the facility failed to .Evaluate/analyze the hazards and risks and eliminate them, if possible .if not possible .identify and implement measures to reduce the hazards/risks as much as possible .Implement interventions, including adequate supervision and assistive devices, consistent with a 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
• Actual harm · G2024-02-29 · tag F0835 — failed to run the facility competently — isolated
  Administer the facility in a manner that enables it to use its resources effectively and efficiently.
  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, review of facility documentation, and interview, the facility's Administration failed to provide effective oversight and follow the facility's corporate notification protocol for falls with major injury which resulted in actual Harm of Resident #3 of 5 residents reviewed for falls and had the potential to affect all 86 residents residing in the facility. The facility was cited as past non-compliance and the facility is not required to submit a Plan of Correction for F-835. Non-compliance began on 9/26/2022 and ended on 8/28/2023. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Incident and Reportable Event Management, dated 9/14/2023, .each resident receives adequate supervision .to prevent accidents .facility has identified the following events as being Never Event [fall that results in serious injury or fracture] and when these type of events occur the Director or Nursing and/or Executive Director should contact their Regional and Divisional team to review 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.

  Administration Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
• Actual harm · G2019-07-31 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
  Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
  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 follow professional standards of practice per the comprehensive care plan for pain management for 1 resident (#87) of 3 residents reviewed for pain management of 21 sampled residents. The facility's failure to follow professional standards of practice for pain management resulted in actual HARM to Resident #87. The findings include: Review of the facility policy Pain Management dated 11/2016 revealed, .Purpose .To promote patient well-being by reducing their pain .Based on comprehensive assessment [of] the patient, the facility must ensure that pain management is provided to residents who require such services, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' goals and preferences . Medical record review revealed Resident #87 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Acquired Absence of Right Leg Below Knee, End Stage…

  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
• Actual harm · G2019-07-31 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolated
  Provide safe, appropriate pain management 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 facility policy review, medical record review, observation, and interview the facility failed to provide effective pain management for 1 resident (#87) of 3 residents reviewed for pain of 21 sampled residents. The facility's failure to implement an effective pain management program for Resident #87 resulted in an increase in severe pain and actual HARM to Resident #87. The findings include: Review of the facility policy, Pain Management, dated 11/2016, revealed, .Purpose .To promote patient well-being by reducing their pain .Based on .assessment .the facility must ensure that pain management is provided to residents who require such services .Recognition and Management of Pain: In order to help a patient attain or maintain his or her highest practicable level of well-being and to prevent or manage pain, the facility .Recognizes when the patient is experiencing pain .Evaluates the existing pain .Manages or prevents pain . Medical record review revealed Resident #87 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]…

  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 · Fcited before2024-07-17 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on facility policy review, observation, and interview the facility failed to ensure food items were stored properly in the kitchen and in 2 of 2 nourishment rooms and failed to ensure dishes and food preparation equipment were clean and sanitary which had the potential to affect 84 of 85 residents. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Sanitation and Food Safety, revised 9/8/2022, revealed .food is placed in a .sanitary .container .is labeled .with date .Associate food will not be stored with resident food .Opened packages of food are resealed tightly to prevent contamination of the food item . Review of the facility's policy titled, Safe Food Handling, revised 4/26/2023, revealed .All working surfaces, utensils and equipment are cleaned and sanitized appropriately after each use .Perishable food is not left in the danger zone [41 degrees to 135 degrees Fahrenheit] more than four hours .If this occurs, it is to be discarded . Review of the facility's policy titled, Sanitation and Maintenance, revised 4/26/2023, revealed .Director of Food and Nutrition…

  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 · F2024-07-17 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespread
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy review, medical record review, observations, and interviews the facility failed to implement Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) for 8 residents (Residents #34, #1,#43,#50,#21,#72,#66, and #587) of 85 residents reviewed for invasive devices. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Enhanced Barrier Precautions, dated 6/3/2024, revealed .The facility should use Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) as an additional .mitigation strategy for residents that meet the following criteria, during high-contact resident care activities .indwelling devices .examples include central lines, urinary catheters, feeding tubes . Review of the medical record revealed Resident #34 was admitted to facility on 10/6/2023 with diagnoses including Acute on Chronic Systolic Congestive Heart Failure, Stage 3 Chronic Kidney Disease, and Neuromuscular Dysfunction of Bladder. Review of a comprehensive care plan initiated on 10/6/2023 and revised on 5/6/2024, revealed .resident has Indwelling…

  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 · D2024-07-17 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure medical information was not visible for 1 resident (Resident #52) of 85 residents observed. The findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Resident Rights, reviewed on 9/25/2023, revealed .A facility must treat each resident with respect and dignity .The resident has a right to personal privacy and confidentiality of his or her personal and medical records . Review of the facility policy titled, Dignity, reviewed on 9/25/2023, revealed .Each resident has the right to be treated with dignity and respect .The resident has a right to a dignified existence .The facility must protect and promote the rights of the resident .The resident has a right to be treated with respect and dignity .Staff should not .document in charts/electronic health records where others can see a resident's information . Review of the medical record review revealed Resident #52 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-07-17 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
  Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy review, medical record review, and interview, the facility failed to notify resident representatives of a change in condition for 2 residents (Residents #14 and #46) of 6 residents reviewed. The findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Changes in Resident's Condition or Status, reviewed on 8/9/2023, revealed .This facility will notify the .resident/resident representative of changes in the resident's condition or status .A facility must immediately .notify .the resident representative(s) when there is .An accident involving the resident which results in injury and has the potential for requiring physician intervention . Review of the facility policy titled, Incident and Reportable Event Management, reviewed on 9/14/2023, revealed .Event Management includes .Fall .Unwitnessed or Witnessed .Incident/Injury .The licensed nurse should create an 'event note' and include .Notification of family or responsible party . Review of the medical record revealed Resident #14 was…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-07-17 · tag F0641 — isolated
  Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
  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, review of the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Manual 3.0, medical record review, and interview the facility failed to accurately complete Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments for 4 residents (Resident #1, #84, #45 and #52) of 42 residents reviewed for accuracy of MDS assessments. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Certification of Accuracy of the MDS, dated 8/17/2022, revealed .Each person completing .the MDS is required to sign the attestation statement certifying they have used the .Resident Assessment Instrument User's Manual to complete the MDS .The assessment must accurately reflect the resident's status . Review of the RAI Manual 3.0 dated 10/2023, revealed .The MDS is completed on all residents in Medicare or Medicaid certified facilities .Sections A-Q contain the clinical data items used to assess residents in the nursing facility .Assure that the information found in the resident's most current assessment .report changes in 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-07-17 · tag F0644 — isolated
  Coordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy review, medical record review and interview, the facility failed to resubmit a Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) timely after a new mental health diagnosis for 2 residents (Residents #11 and #39) of 10 residents reviewed for PASARR. The findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR), reviewed on 9/25/2023, revealed .The facility will ensure that all potential admissions are to be screened for possible serious mental disorders .This initial pre-screening is referred to as PASARR Level I, and is completed prior to admission .A negative Level I screen permits admission to proceed and ends the PASARR process unless a possible serious mental disorder .arises later .A facility must coordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review (PASARR) program .Coordinate includes .Referring all Level II residents and all residents with newly evident or possible serious mental disorder .for level II…

  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 · D2024-07-17 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolated
  Ensure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
  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 change a tube feeding bag and tubing every 24 hours for 1 resident (Resident #587) of 2 residents reviewed for tube feeding. The findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Enteral Nutrition Therapy, revised 5/28/2024, revealed .The facility will provide intermittent enteral nutrition therapy in accordance with physician orders and professional standards of practice .Enteral feeding .also referred to as 'tube feeding' .delivery of nutrients .directly into the stomach . Review of the medical record revealed Resident #587 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Hemiplegia and Hemiparesis, Gastrostomy [surgical procedure to make an opening in the stomach for tube feeding], Cognitive Communication Deficit, and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD). Review of a Nutrition assessment for Resident #587 dated 7/15/2024, revealed the resident was to receive nutritional…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-07-17 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
  Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy review, medical record review, observation and interview, the facility failed to store the nebulizer and the Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP - equipment used for individuals with sleep apnea) masks appropriately for 3 residents (Residents #587, #588, and #589) of 21 residents reviewed for respiratory equipment. The findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Oxygen Administration (Safety, Storage, Maintenance), revised 2/27/2024, revealed .facility must ensure that a resident who needs respiratory care .is provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice .Store .respiratory supplies in bag labeled with resident's name when not in use . Review of the medical record revealed Resident #587 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Hemiplegia and Hemiparesis, Obstructive Sleep Apnea and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD). Review of a mental status assessment dated [DATE], revealed Resident #587 scored a 5 on the…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-07-17 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — isolated
  Dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based on facility policy review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure 1 of 1 garbage and refuse storage area was kept in a sanitary condition. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Disposal of Garbage and Refuse, reviewed 4/30/2024, revealed .All areas where garbage/refuse is located is kept clean, free of debris .The garbage storage area is maintained in a sanitary condition to prevent the harborage and feeding of pests . During an observation on 7/15/2024 at 11:44 AM, with the Certified Dietary Manager (CDM), the dumpster area had 2 dumpsters surrounded on 3 sides by a fence. Between the fence and the right dumpster, there was trash on the ground consisting of paper, used exam gloves and straws. Behind the dumpster there was 1 partially decayed animal carcass with exposed bones. During an interview on 7/15/2024 at 11:50 AM, the CDM confirmed the dumpster area was generally unclean and had not been maintained in a sanitary condition.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-02-29 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
  Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted 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 facility policy review, medical record review, and interviews, the facility failed to maintain an accurate medical record for 1 resident (Resident #3) of 15 residents reviewed for medical records. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Authentication of All Record Entries, dated 3/10/2023, .entries are made as soon as possible after an event or observation is made . Review of the facility's policy titled, Refusal of Care or Treatment, dated 8/10/2023, .Documentation of the refusal .should be present in the resident's medical record . Resident #3 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Hemiplegia, Hemiparesis, Lack of Coordination, and Muscle Weakness. Review of a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], showed Resident #3 scored 13 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) assessment, which indicated the resident was cognitively intact and required total 2-person assistance with transfers. Review of Resident # 3's comprehensive 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning 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

$8,512 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $8,512 — penalty dated 2024-02-29

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 →

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

The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

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.

This home reported $1.9M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 18% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

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