Spring Meadows Health and Rehabilitation
220 Highway 76, Clarksville, TN 37043 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 121 certified beds · (931) 552-0219 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has abuse, neglect, or exploitation citations (F0609, F0610) — most recent Jul 2022
- inspectors cited 5 immediate-jeopardy problems — the most serious level
- a high number of inspection citations overall (21) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
- its last standard health inspection was over 2 years ago — the star rating may not reflect current conditions
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 | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 4 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
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 | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 4 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 1 to 2 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
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 | 9.9% | 14.0% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 4.2% | 6.1% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.2% | 0.7% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.3% | 1.8% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 25.9% | 13.8% | 6.5% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger 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 | 1.1% | 3.4% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 8.3% | 17.2% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 23.7% | 31.7% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 94.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 2.8% | 5.0% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 17.7% | 20.0% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 17.9% | 16.8% | 17.1% | typical |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.9% | 1.7% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 83.1% | 79.8% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 12.0% | 22.6% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 10.2% | 11.2% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 0.65 | 1.67 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.64 | 1.56 | 1.80 | better |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
46.7% 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 109 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 42.5% 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 80 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 0.20 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 23% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 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.
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 | 46.7%CMS range 39.5–57.5 | 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 | 11.2%CMS range 8.6–15.4 | 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 | 42.5% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 51.2% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 38.8% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 97.1% | 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 | 95.2% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 92.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 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 | 5.7%CMS range 3.2–10.0 | 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 121 beds and averages 110.4 residents a day — about 91% occupied, or roughly 11 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 3.43 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.54 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.98 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 3.20 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.52 on weekdays — 9% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.63 to 0.34 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 39% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
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.
21 citations, most serious first. The 15 most serious are shown; the remaining 6 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2022-07-25 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely 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 weather website review, policy review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to report incidents of elopement for 2 of 7 sampled residents (Resident #45 and #87) reviewed for wandering and elopement. The facility's failure to report incidents of elopement to the State Survey Agency resulted in Immediate Jeopardy when Resident #45, a vulnerable, severely cognitively impaired resident, exited the facility without staff knowledge or supervision and was found approximately 94.6 feet from the New Wing North exit door, standing in the parking lot on a cold January day, out of sight of the staff for approximately five to ten minutes and when Resident #87 a vulnerable, moderately cognitively impaired resident exited the facility without staff knowledge or supervision and was found leaning against the building, outside the New Wing South exit door, at approximately Midnight, out of sight of the staff for an undetermined amount of time. Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) is a situation in…
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.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2022-07-25 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
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, job description review, facility investigation review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure incidents of elopement, staff-to-resident abuse, and drug diversions were thoroughly investigated for 5 of 10 sampled residents (Resident #45, #87, #19, #68, and #90) reviewed for wandering/elopement behaviors and at risk for abuse. The facility's failure to thoroughly investigate incidents of elopement resulted in Immediate Jeopardy when Resident #45, a cognitively impaired resident at risk for wandering/elopement, exited the facility without staff knowledge, walked approximately 94.6 feet from the facility, and was found standing in the parking lot in the back of the facility and when Resident #87 a vulnerable, moderately cognitively impaired resident exited the facility without staff knowledge or supervision and was found leaning against the building, outside the New Wing South exit door, at approximately Midnight, out of sight of the staff for 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.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2022-07-25 · 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 weather website review, policy review, facility investigation review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a safe environment and provide adequate supervision to prevent elopement for 2 of 7 sampled residents (Resident #45 and #87) reviewed for elopement/wandering behaviors. Resident #45, who had severely impaired cognition, was at risk for wandering, and was a fall risk, exited the facility without staff knowledge through the New Wing North exit door on a cold January day, walked approximately 94.6 feet and was found by staff standing in the parking lot for an undetermined amount of time. Resident #87, who had severely impaired cognition, was at risk for wandering, and was a fall risk, exited the facility without staff knowledge through the New Wing South exit door and was found leaning against the building outside the door, out of view of the staff. The facility's failure to ensure residents at risk for wandering/elopement behaviors were adequately…
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.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2022-07-25 · tag F0835 — failed to run the facility competently — isolatedAdminister 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
Based on policy review, Board of Examiners for Nursing Home Administrators (BENHA) review, job description review, and interview, the facility Administration failed to administer the facility in a manner that enabled the facility to use its resources effectively and efficiently to attain the highest practicable well-being of cognitively impaired residents with wandering behaviors. Administration failed to provide oversight to monitor and provide a safe resident environment for cognitively impaired residents with wandering behaviors, to report, and investigate incidents of elopement. These failures resulted in Immediate Jeopardy when Resident #45, a severely cognitively impaired resident with exit-seeking behaviors, exited the building without staff knowledge or supervision and was found approximately 94.6 feet from an exit door, standing in the parking lot on a cold January day, out of staff sight for five to ten minutes and when Resident #87, a moderately cognitively impaired resident exited the facility without staff knowledge or supervision and was found leaning against 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.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2022-07-25 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — isolatedSet up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
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, job description review, Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) reports, medical record review, observation, and interview, the QAPI committee failed to ensure systems and processes were in place that involved tracking/trending, evaluation/reevaluation of interventions, data, and trends to address quality concerns related to wandering and elopement behaviors. The QAPI committee failed to ensure a thorough investigation of a resident elopement, failed to identify quality deficiencies and effective interventions, failed to monitor the effectiveness of the interventions, and failed to assess staff knowledge of the care of residents with wandering/elopement behaviors in order to identify deviations and adverse events when residents exited the facility without staff knowledge. The facility's failure resulted in Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) when Resident #45, a cognitively impaired resident assessed as a risk for wandering/elopement left the facility unsupervised and was found in the back…
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 · Ecited before2024-07-11 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide 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 proper infection control practices for 1 of 2 (Resident #20) residents reviewed for isolation precaution. The facility had a census of 107. The findings include: 1. Review of the facility's policy titled, Transmission Based (Isolation) Precautions, dated 6/4/2024, revealed, Signage that includes instructions for use of specific PPE [personal protective equipment] will be placed in a conspicuous location outside of the resident's- room .either the CDC [Centers for Disease Control] category of transmission-based precautions .contact, droplet, or airborne .or instructions to see the nurse before entering will be included in the signage .Contact Precautions .Intended to prevent transmission of pathogens that are spread by direct or indirect contact with the resident or the resident's environment . Review of the facility's undated policy titled, Recommendations for Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), 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 · D2024-07-11 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor 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
Based on policy review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to provide effective maintenance services to ensure a safe, functional, and comfortable environment as evidenced by the disrepair of the bathroom flooring for 1 out of 104 occupied resident's rooms. The findings include: 1. Review of the facility's policy, titled, Preventive Maintenance, with a date of 3/1/2023, revealed, .A Preventive Maintenance Program shall be developed and implemented to ensure the provision of a safe, functional, sanitary, and comfortable environmental for residents, staff, and the public .The Maintenance Director is responsible for developing and maintaining a schedule of maintenance services to ensure that the buildings, grounds, and equipment are maintained in a sage and operable manner . 2. Observations and interview in the resident's room on 7/08/2024 at 11:20 AM, 7/09/2024 at 8:00 AM, and on 7/09/2024 at 3:33 PM, revealed in Resident #17's bathroom was a large area of missing pieces of linoleum in multiple places around the resident's toilet. Resident #17 confirmed the bathroom floor…
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 · D2024-07-11 · tag F0640 — isolatedEncode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of 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 review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Manual, medical record review, and interview, the facility failed to complete resident assessments, using the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services-specific RAI (Resident Assessment Instrument) process, within the regulatory time frames for 7 of 28 sampled residents (Resident #5, #17, #22, #48, #76, #86, and #93) reviewed for completion of the MDS resident assessments. The findings include: 1. Review of the MDS 3.0 RAI Manual v (version) 1.17.1 October 2019, page 2-37 revealed .using the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services-specific RAI process within the regulatory time frames. 2. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #5 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses including Diabetes, Coronary Artery Disease, Hypertension, Depression, and Polyneuropathy. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 11/7/2022, revealed Item Z0500B with a completion date 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-11 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop 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 policy review, medical record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a care plan meeting was scheduled for 2 of 2 (Resident #8 and #23) reviewed for care plan meeting. The findings include: 1. Review of the facility's undated policy titled CARE PLANNING - RESIDENT PARTICIPATION, revealed .The facility supports the resident's right to inform of, and participate in, his or her care planning and treatment .The facility will notify the resident and/or resident representative, in advance, of the care to be furnished and the type of caregiver or professional that will furnish care, as well as changes to the plan of care . 2. Medical record review revealed Resident #8 was admitted [DATE], with diagnoses including Dementia, Depression, Diabetes, Anxiety, and Bipolar Disorder. Review of quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], revealed Resident #8 was cognitively intact. During an interview on 7/9/2024 11:20 AM, Resident #8 was asked if she attended the care plan meetings. Resident #8 stated,…
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 · D2024-07-11 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolatedEnsure 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 medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure followed practitioner orders for a Percutaneous Gastrostomy (PEG) tube feeding and failed to date and label PEG tube feedings for 1 of 2 (Resident #63) sampled residents reviewed for enteral feedings. The findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #63 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses including Hemiplegia and Hemiparesis, Depression, Anxiety, and PEG tube (Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy tube, a tube inserted into the stomach to deliver food). Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], revealed Resident #63 was severely cognitively impaired, total dependence on staff for Activities of Daily Living, and coded for a PEG tube. Review of the facility's Order Review History Report. dated 6/11/2024 - 7/11/2024 revealed, .Enteral Feed Order six times a day Free water flushes 150 ml [milliliters] Q [every] 4H [hours], provides 900 total fluid .Enteral Feed Order every…
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 · D2024-07-11 · tag F0947 — failed to train nurse aides adequately — isolatedEnsure nurse aides have the skills they need to care for residents, and give nurse aides education in dementia care and abuse prevention.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of staff in-services and interview the facility failed to ensure the mandatory annual 12 hours of in-services were provided for the Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) for 12 of 61 staff members (CNA A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, and L reviewed for in-servicing training. The findings include: 1. Review of the facility's policy titled, CNA REQUIRED TRAINING, dated 3/1/2023, revealed It is the policy of this facility to comply with State and Federal requirements as they pertain to the training, certification, and continuing education if its nurse aides .The facility will provide at least 12 hours of in-service training annually, based on the employment date, not calendar year .Documentation of the in-services will be forwarded to the HR [Human Resource] Director . 2. Review of a list of CNA staff provided by the facility revealed the following: CNA A was hired on 11/30/2022. CNA B was hired on 1/12/2022. CNA C was hired on 9/4/2013. CNA D was hired on 7/22/2020. CNA E was hired on 2/14/2018. CNA F was hired on 6/30/2020. CNA G was hired on 2/3/2021. CNA H was hired 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 · Fcited before2022-07-25 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure 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, the facility failed to ensure food was stored, prepared, and served under sanitary conditions when the oven had build-up of a shiny, brown substance on the inside doors and all sides in the inside of the oven, the coffee machine had a build-up of black splashes and the spout of the coffee machine had a build-up of a dark gray substance, the toaster had a build-up of crumbs, the juice machine had a build-up of a thick, orange, red, and tan substance on the spout and on the sides of the machine, there was a pink, slimy substance on the water curtain of the ice machine in the Dining Room, the stove's grease trap was filled with a black liquid with thick black stringy material and a thermometer floating in it, the stove's drip pan had several particles of dried food and dark grime covering the pan, there was a build-up of a black substance inside the gas oven on all sides, there was thick, dark brown build-up on the can opener, there was a build-up of dark, brown crumbs on top of the deep fryer and inside the deep fryer, 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.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2022-07-25 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines, policy review, review of Employee Screening logs, employee time sheets, agency invoices, and interview, the facility failed to ensure practices to prevent the spread of infection were maintained when 23 of 121 staff members (Dietary Aide #2, #3, and #4, Housekeeper #1, #2, #3, and #4, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #4 and #8, Agency LPN #1, #2, and #3, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #4, #5, #6, and #7, and Agency CNA #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, and #7) failed to complete screening for the prevention and detection of COVID-19 prior to working on 1 of 1 days (7/15/2022) reviewed. This had the potential to affect the 109 residents residing in the facility. The findings include: Review of the facility's undated policy titled, Coronavirus Surveillance, revealed .This facility will implement heightened surveillance activities for coronavirus illness during periods of transmission in the community and/or during a declared public health emergency for the illness .Screening for visitors and staff .Signs or symptoms of a…
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 · E2022-07-25 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — patternHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
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 provide information regarding a resident's right to formulate an Advance Directive to residents or the residents' responsible parties for 21 of 24 sampled residents (Resident #2, #3, #9, #12, #14, #15, #16, #19, #22, #28, #30, #34, #39, #45, #62, #67, #76, #82, #100, #153 and #255) reviewed for Advanced Directives. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Communication of Code Status dated 2017, revealed .It is the policy of this facility to adhere to residents' rights to formulate advance directives .The facility will follow facility policy regarding a resident's right to request, refuse and/or discontinue medical or surgical treatment and to formulate an Advance Directive . Review of the medical record, revealed Resident #2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Metabolic Encephalopathy, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Seizures, and Cerebral Infarction. Review of the admission…
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 · D2022-07-25 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
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 1 of 4 sampled residents (Resident #37) were free of a significant medication error when 1 of 5 licensed nurses (Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #4) administered an incorrect dosage of an anticoagulant medication. The findings include: Review of the facility's undated policy titled, High Risk Medications-Anticoagulants, revealed .Anticoagulant refers to a class of medications that are used to prevent clot extension and formation .Xarelto .Anticoagulants shall be prescribed by a physician or other authorized practitioner with clear indications for use . Review of the facility's undated policy titled, Medication Administration, revealed .Medications are administered by licensed nurses .as ordered by the physician . Review of the facility's undated policy titled, Medication Errors, revealed .The facility shall ensure medications will be administered as follows .according to physician's orders . Review of 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.
Show the remaining 6 citations
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2020-03-12 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure 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, Registered Dietician contract review, record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to maintain proper kitchen sanitation when 2 of 6 Kitchen staff (Dietary Aide #2 and #3) had unrestrained facial hair, food was open to air in the freezer, and 2 of 3 Kitchen staff (Cook #1 and Dietary Aide #1) did not record the correct 3 compartment sink sanitizer results. This had a potential to affect 85 of the 89 residents receiving meals from the Kitchen. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, [Named Nursing Home] Food Safety Requirements, dated 3/1/2019, showed, .Refrigerated storage .or placed in freezer .Keeping foods covered or in tight containers .Dietary staff must wear hair restraints .hairnet .beard restraint . Review of the facility's Registered Dietician contract showed, .The program manager will provide guidance and training to the Dietary Manager .in all areas of kitchen management .[Named Corporation] will oversee management .assure regulatory compliance in-service training . 1. Observation in the Kitchen 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 · E2020-03-12 · tag F0802 — failed to prepare enough nourishing food — patternProvide sufficient support personnel to safely and effectively carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on policy review, record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to employ sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition services for 3 of 3 (Cook #1, Dietary Aide #1, and Dietary Manager) Kitchen staff observed performing sanitizer testing. This had a potential to affect 85 of the 89 residents receiving meals from the kitchen. The findings include: Review of the facility's undated policy titled, Manual Ware Washing - 3 Compartment Sink, showed, .The facility utilizes a 3 compartment sink to wash, rinse, and sanitize pots, pans and other utensils to prevent the spread of bacteria that may cause food borne illness .Third step: Sanitizing with .chemical sanitizing solution used according to manufacturer's instructions . Observation and interview in the Kitchen on 3/9/2020 at 10:53 AM, the Dietary Manager stated that they had not had the correct strips to test the 3 compartment sink. The Dietary Manager performed a test for pH (acid base balance). The Dietary Manager confirmed the chemical supply…
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 · D2020-03-12 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop 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
Based on facility policy review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive Care Plan to reflect the resident's current status for antidepressant, anticoagulant, and antianxiety medication use for 2 of 21 sampled residents (Resident #21 and #28) reviewed. The findings include: Review of the facility's undated policy titled, Comprehensive Care Plan, showed, .It is the policy of this facility to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident .The comprehensive care plan will be reviewed and revised by the interdisciplinary team after each comprehensive and quarterly MDS [Minimum Data Set] assessment . 1. Review of the medical record, showed Resident #21 had diagnoses of Peripheral Vascular Disease, End Stage Renal Disease, Heart Failure, Diabetes Mellitus, Hypertension, Dependent on Renal Dialysis, Anxiety, Psychotic Disorder with Hallucinations, and Depression. Review of the Physician's Order dated 8/27/2019, showed, .Sertraline [an antidepressant] .50 mg [milligram] .QHS [every hour of sleep] .…
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 · D2020-03-12 · 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
Based on facility policy review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to document assessments and follow physician's orders for 1 of 2 sampled residents (Resident #77) reviewed with pressure injuries. The findings include: Review of the facility's undated policy titled, Pressure Injury Prevention And Management, showed, .Assessments of pressure injuries will be performed by a licensed nurse, and documented .The RN [Registered Nurse], or designee, will review all relevant documentation regarding skin assessments .and compliance at least weekly, and document a summary of findings in the medical record . Review of the medical record review, showed Resident #77 had diagnoses of Metabolic Encephalopathy, Cerebral Infarction, Hypertension, Anxiety, Vascular Dementia, Depression, and Diabetes Mellitus. Review of a Physician's Order dated 1/28/2020, showed Resident #77 had orders to, .Clean unstageable wound to left medial heel with NS [normal saline], dry. Paint area with Betadine, cover with non-adherent pad . Review of the January 2020 Treatment…
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 · D2020-03-12 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide 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 obtain a physician's order for oxygen therapy for 1 of 1 sampled residents (Resident #83) reviewed for oxygen. The findings include: Review of the facility's undated policy titled, OXYGEN ADMINISTRATION, showed, .Oxygen is administered to residents who need it, consistent with professional standards of practice . Review of the medical record, showed Resident #83 had diagnoses of Acute Respiratory Failure with Hypoxia, Heart Failure, Pneumonia, and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], showed that Resident #83 received oxygen therapy. Review of the medical record, showed that there was not a Physician's Order for oxygen. Observation in the resident's room on 3/9/2020 at 11:35 AM and 3:18 PM, and on 3/10/2020 at 8:14 AM, showed Resident #83 was receiving oxygen per bi-nasal cannula (BNC) at 4 liters per minute (L/Min). During an interview conducted…
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 before2020-03-12 · 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
Based on facility policy review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure measures to prevent the potential spread of infection were followed when 2 of 2 nurses (Director of Nursing (DON) and Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1) failed to perform proper hand hygiene for 2 of 4 sampled residents (Resident #77 and Resident #189) observed during wound care and isolation, and when 1 of 1 nurses (LPN #2) failed to properly dispose of a contaminated lancet for 1 of 1 sampled resident (Resident #86) observed during blood glucose monitoring. The findings include: 1. Review of the facility's undated policy titled, Clean Dressing Change, showed, .12. Cleanse the wound as ordered .13. Measure wound .14. Wash hands and put on clean gloves .16. Secure dressing . Review of the medical record, showed Resident #77 had diagnoses of Metabolic Encephalopathy, Cerebral Infarction, Hypertension, Anxiety, Vascular Dementia, Depression, and Diabetes Mellitus. Review of the Physician Order dated 3/9/2020, showed, .Clean wound to left medical [medial] heel with NS…
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.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to LYON HEALTHCARE — 11 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 →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 2 of 5 | 1.7 | +0.3 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 1 of 5 | 1.8 | -0.8 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 1.4 | +0.6 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 2.9 | +2.1 vs chain |
The other 10 homes this chain runs (chain average 1.7★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TKY 2 SNF OPERATIONS HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | 100% | since 11/01/2024 |
| LION 26 HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 11/01/2024 |
| SABRINA 1818 HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 11/01/2024 |
| SAESSY IRREVOCABLE TRUST | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 11/01/2024 |
| TATIRIQ IRREVOCABLE TRUST | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | — | since 11/01/2024 |
| CARVER, DILLION | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/01/2024 |
| IDELS, SHIMON | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/01/2024 |
| ROBINSON, JENNIFER | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/01/2024 |
| SCHWARTZ, STEVEN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/01/2024 |
| WILLIAMS, JOHN | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/22/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 18 rows in the source record cover these 10 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
5 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 76% 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 $582K 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 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 445402. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-07-11, 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.