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

Bradley Health Care & Rehab

2910 Peerless Rd, Cleveland, TN 37312 · For profit - Corporation · 213 certified beds · (423) 472-7116 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (423) 472-7116 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse/neglect citation on record (F0600) — cited Feb 2024Behavioral-health or dementia-care citation at the harm level (F0744)1 actual-harm citation1 actual-harm citation CMS recorded as corrected before the inspection ended (past non-compliance)$8,999 in federal fines
Insights

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

Worth asking about
  • it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Feb 2024
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • it has 1 actual-harm citation
  • inspectors recorded 1 serious finding as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
  • the CMS record shows $8,999 in federal fines (most recent 2024-02-27)
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
  • its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
  • its last standard health inspection was over 3 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.

1/5
CMS overall
1 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 2 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 1 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 2 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★ 2/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
1060 Peerless Xing NW · (423) 479-4165 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
1075 Peerless Xing NW · (423) 339-3363 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
3400 Keith St NW · (423) 472-5034 · Call to confirm hours
Park
3110 Peerless Rd NW · (423) 728-7035 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
900 Clingan Ridge Dr NW · (423) 476-8123

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 2 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 2 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 3 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 2 to 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating3★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased18.5%14.0%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight2.9%6.1%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.4%0.7%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection1.5%1.8%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms1.3%13.8%6.5%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury3.9%3.4%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened30.0%17.2%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication30.5%31.7%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine94.0%94.5%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers5.3%5.0%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control18.8%20.0%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table20.7%16.8%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication1.0%1.7%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine72.6%79.8%79.4%typical
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission23.9%22.6%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit14.8%11.2%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.561.671.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.981.561.80worse

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.

57.2% 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 168 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

57.2%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
12.4%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
66.7%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.30U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.19hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.09hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.01hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 66.7% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 66 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 0.30 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 48% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 3% 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.

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF57.2%CMS range 49.5–64.451.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF12.4%CMS range 9.6–16.110.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge66.7%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge59.1%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge59.1%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified94.6%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge96.5%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay1.1%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened3.3%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.8%CMS range 4.7–12.07.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.821.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

0.32
RN hours/ resident / day
1.21
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.89
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.42
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.18
RN hoursweekends
51.0%
Total nursing turnover
70.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 213 beds and averages 98.3 residents a day — about 46% occupied, or roughly 115 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 3.42 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.32 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.89 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 2.90 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.63 on weekdays — 20% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.38 to 0.18 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 51% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

4
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2022-11-02)
0
at the previous standard inspection (2019-12-18)

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 3 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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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

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

  • Actual harm · G2026-05-28 · tag F0744 — failed to care for residents with dementia — isolated
    Provide the appropriate treatment and services to a resident who displays or is diagnosed with dementia.
    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, video surveillance footage review and interview, the facility failed to provide individualized behavioral interventions, and sufficient supervision to prevent wandering, and exit seeking behaviors, for 1 resident (Resident #1) of 4 residents reviewed for behaviors which resulted in actual Harm to Resident #1. The facility's failure to provide sufficient monitoring, supervision, and adequate care plan interventions in response to wandering and exit seeking behaviors, resulted in Resident #1 sustaining fall related injuries during a wandering episode on 4/28/2026. The findings include: Review of the facility's undated policy titled, Elopements and Wandering Residents, revealed .Residents determined to be at risk for elopement will be monitored by staff . Review of the facility's undated policy titled, Behavior Management Policy, revealed .It is the policy of [Named Facility] .to minimize challenging and inappropriate behavior .within the facility .so that all…

    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
  • Actual harm · G2024-02-27 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
    Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of facility policy, medical record review, review of the facility investigation, observation, and interviews, the facility failed to prevent abuse for 1 resident, (Resident #2) of 7 residents reviewed for abuse or neglect. The facility's failure to prevent abuse with subsequent injuries of Resident #2 after an assault by Resident #3, resulted in actual Harm of Resident #2. F 600 was cited at a Harm as past non-compliance. The facility is not required to submit additional corrective actions. The findings included: Review of the facility titled, Abuse Policy, revised [DATE], showed .It is the policy of this facility to provide protections .and procedures that prohibit and prevent abuse .Abuse means the willful infliction of injury .resulting physical harm .which can include .certain resident to resident altercations . Medical record review showed Resident #2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses including Alzheimer's Disease, Dementia with Severe Agitation and Behaviors,…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · E2026-05-28 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — pattern
    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

    Based on review of the facility policy, observation, and interview, the facility failed to remove resident plates and utensils from serving trays, to promote a dignified dining experience for 8 of 8 residents observed in the [NAME] 1 dining room and delayed assistance to 1 dependent resident (Resident #13) for 20 minutes who was seated at the same table as other residents received and finished their meals.The findings include: Review of the undated facility policy titled, Promoting/Maintaining Resident Dignity, revealed .It is the practice of this facility to .promote .and treat each resident with respect and dignity .care for each resident in a manner and in an environment, that maintains or enhances quality of life .Each Resident will be provided equal access to quality of care, regardless of diagnosis, severity of condition . Review of the medical record revealed Resident #13 was admitted to the facility 11/25/2025 with diagnoses including Adjustment-Disorder with Depressed Mood, Mild Cognitive Impairment, Generalized Anxiety, Unspecified Tremor, Moderate Malnutrition, and Muscle…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-05-28 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on review of the facility abuse policy, review of facility investigations, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure facility reported incidents (FRI) related to allegations of abuse were reported within a timely manner for 4 residents (Residents #1, # 2 #3 and #4) of 11 residents sampled for abuse or neglect.The findings included: Review of the facility policy and procedure Resident Abuse revealed .When an incident of suspected resident abuse, mistreatment, or neglect is reported the following will occur .The case of suspected abuse will be reported per regulation to the Department of Health by Administrator or Designee .If you have witnessed or have knowledge of such actions in this facility, please give an immediate report to Administration .Resident Abuse May Also Be Reported to . (State Agency) . (Ombudsman) . Review of the facility FRI (incident 2998873) dated 4/29/2026 revealed the incident referenced in the FRI included allegations of potential resident versus resident abuse, which was documented to have occurred on the evening of 4/28/2026 around 7:50 PM between…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-11-02 · tag F0640 — isolated
    Encode 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 medical record reviews, and interviews, the facility failed to complete a discharge Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for 1 resident (Resident #8) and the facility completed a 5-day MDS assessment for 1 resident (Resident #62) after discharged from the facility of 20 residents reviewed for MDS assessments. The findings include: Resident #8 was admitted to facility on 1/31/2020 with diagnoses including Disorders of the Kidney and Ureter, Abnormal Weight Loss, Hallucinations, Delusions, and Anxiety. Review of the quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] showed Resident #8 was currently admitted in the facility. Continue review showed a discharge assessment was not completed on 5/26/2022 by the facility upon discharge. Review of a nurses' notes dated 5/26/2022, showed Resident #8 was transferred to the Emergency Department (ED) for evaluation and treatment. Review of a nurses' note dated 6/1/2022, showed the resident's daughter called the facility and was taking Resident #8 home on hospice services…

    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 · D2022-11-02 · 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 ensure proper storage of oxygen cylinders (tanks) (metal container filled with compressed gas and held under high pressure) in 1 resident's room (Resident #10) of 9 residents reviewed for oxygen usage. The findings include: Review of the undated facility policy, titled, POLICY AND PROCEDURE OXYGEN CYLINDERS, showed .Never drop cylinders or permit them to strike each other .Store cylinders of oxygen in a cool place, away from radiators . Resident #10 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Anxiety Disorder, Localized Edema, Dyspnea, Morbid Obesity, Dependence on Supplemental Oxygen, Encounter for Palliative Care, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), and on 9/13/2022 COVID-19. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], showed Resident #10 received oxygen and hospice services. Review of the current physician's orders revised 10/4/2022, showed Oxygen continuous…

    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 · D2022-11-02 · tag F0849 — isolated
    Arrange for the provision of hospice services or assist the resident in transferring to a facility that will arrange for the provision of hospice 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 hospice contract review, medical record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure timely and collaborative communication between the hospice provider and the facility for 1 resident (Resident #24) of 6 residents reviewed for hospice services. The findings include: Review of the hospice contract titled, HOSPICE AND SKILLED NURSING FACILITY AGREEMENT, dated [DATE] and renewed annually, showed .Hospice shall provide Facility with the following information immediately upon the information becoming available to Hospice .the most recent hospice plan of care specific to each Resident under Hospice's care .Hospice physician and attending physician .orders specific to each Resident .All physician orders communicated to Facility on behalf of Hospice in connection with the Hospice Plan of Care shall be in writing and signed by the applicable Attending Physician or Hospice Physician .Hospice shall comply with the Coordination of Services .Communication Protocol .Hospice and Facility shall work together…

    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 · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2018-10-31 · 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 maintain a sanitary kitchen free from undated, unlabeled foods, or opened to air food items in 2 coolers; and free from dirt and debris in 1 ice cream freezer, 1 walk in cooler, 1 of 3 steam tables, and on 1 dish in the kitchen, potentially affecting 149 of 151 residents. The findings include: Review of facility policy, Dietary Food Storage Policy with an implementation date of 10/29/18 revealed .It is the policy of this facility to avoid inappropriate storage of food products for the safety and well-being of the residents .Improper food storage may include, but not be limited to .Foods uncovered and/or exposed to air .Foods undated .Foods unlabeled .Broken seals, leakage . Review of the facility policy, Refrigerators and Freezers, dated 10/31/18, revealed .Supervisors will inspect refrigerators and freezers .for .ice buildup .Refrigerators and freezers will be kept clean, free of debris, and mopped .on a scheduled basis and more often as necessary . Review of the facility policy, Dietary Equipment…

    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 · F2018-10-31 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — widespread
    Keep all essential equipment working safely.
    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 maintain 1 of 3 three compartment steam tables in safe operating condition in 1 of 1 kitchens potentially affecting 149 of 151 residents. The findings include: Review of the facility policy, Dietary Equipment Serviceability Policy, with an implementation date of 10/29/18, revealed .It is the policy of this facility to maintain proper working equipment .free from .disrepair .Staff members of the Dietary Department must recognize that they have responsibility to insure [ensure] the safe and sanitary working condition of all equipment used in the preparation and delivery of food to the residents of our facility . Observation and interview with the Dietary Manager (DM) on 10/29/18 at 11:16 AM, in the kitchen, of the 3 compartment portable steam table, next to the ice cream freezer, revealed 1 of 3 missing control knobs in 1 of 3 bays. Interview with the DM confirmed the facility used the portable steam table in preparation and delivery of food to the residents in the facility. Continued interview…

    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.

    Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2018-10-31 · tag F0571 — isolated
    Limit the charges against residents' personal funds for items or services for which payment is made under Medicare or Medicaid.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the facility admission packet, medical record review, review of trust transaction history, observation, and interview, the facility charged the personal fund account for incontinence care items for 1 resident (#72) of 34 incontinent residents reviewed of 44 sampled residents. The findings include: Review of the facility admission packet and resident rights revealed the facility would provide incontinence care supplies for the residents. Medical record review revealed Resident #72 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Urinary Tract Infection, Dysuria (painful urination), Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Major Depression, Bipolar Disorder, Primary Insomnia, and Anxiety. Medical record review of Resident #72's admission Record revealed the resident's primary payer source was Medicaid ICF (Intermediate Care Facility). Medical record review of a quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #72's Brief Interview for Mental Status score was 15, indicating…

    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 · D2018-10-31 · 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 medical record review and interview, the facility failed to obtain consent and notify the resident representative of changes to the psychiatric drug regimen of 1 resident (#82) of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications of 44 residents sampled. The findings include: Medical record review revealed Resident #82 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Dementia, History of Transient Ischemic Attack (Stroke), and Anxiety Disorder. Medical record review of a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 10, indicating Resident #82 was moderately cognitively impaired. Medical record review of the Order Listing Report, dated 10/31/18, revealed .Lexapro [antianxiety and antidepressant medication] 5 MG [milligrams] Give 1 tablet by mouth one time a day .Last Order Date .01/26/18 . Medical record review of the Psychiatric Progress Note, dated 1/26/18, revealed .Treatment Plan .1.) Start Lexapro 5 mg PO [by mouth] QDAY [daily] .…

    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 · D2018-10-31 · 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 refer to the state-designated authority for a Level II PASARR (Preadmission Screening and Resident Review), after the resident was identified with a possible serious mental disorder, for 1 resident (#112) of 7 residents reviewed for PASARR. The findings include: Review of facility policy admission Criteria, revised December 2016, revealed .Any new psychiatric diagnosis may indicate the need for a PASSAR . Medical record review revealed Resident #112 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Vascular Dementia, Psychotic Disorder with Delusions, and Hypertension. Medical record review of the PASARR form dated 7/26/17 revealed Resident #112's diagnoses included suspected anxiety disorder and mild depression. Further review revealed the resident was negative for the level one screening, and if the nursing facility determined any inaccuracies in diagnoses, a Status Change review would be required.…

    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
  • No harm found · C2022-11-02 · tag F0888 — widespread
    Ensure staff are vaccinated for COVID-19
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) guidelines, facility policy review, facility COVID-19 (an infectious disease caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus) vaccination documentation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure COVID-19 vaccination medical exemption documentation included all required components for 2 of 3 staff with medical exemptions for the COVID-19 vaccination. The findings include: Review of the CMS Center for Clinical Standards and Quality/Quality, Safety & Oversight Group (QSO-22-07-ALL) memorandum titled, Guidance for the Interim Final Rule - Medicare and Medicaid Programs; Omnibus COVID-19 Health Care Staff Vaccination, dated 12/28/2021, showed .Medicare and Medicaid-certified facilities are expected to comply with all regulatory requirements .Long-Term Care and Skilled Nursing Facility Attachment A .Medical Exemptions .Medical exemption documentation must specify which authorized or licensed COVID-19 vaccine is clinically contraindicated for the staff member and the recognized clinical reasons for the contraindication. The documentation must also include…

    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
Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

$8,999 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $8,999 — penalty dated 2024-02-27

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.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
CRABTREE, DEBORAHIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 03/03/2010
BECK, WENDYIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 03/18/2013
BURTNETT, DENNISIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 04/01/2012
FULLER, ERINIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2011
GEE, JUDYIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 03/18/2013
ROMINGER, ROBERTIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 08/01/2012
SNIDER, SANDRAIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 03/18/2013
STANBERY, JOHNIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 03/18/2013
WINTERS, WILLIAMIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 02/01/2011

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

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.

$10.5M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-19.0%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 71%Medicare 7%Other / private 22%

About 71% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. 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

$338per resident / day
operating cost
$10,280per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$284per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2024). 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

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Tennessee Medicaid page.

Typical monthly cost in Tennessee
$9,429/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$10,038/mo
Nursing home (private)
$5,845/mo
Assisted living

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 445141. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2022-11-02, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next