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

Cordova Wellness And Rehabilitation Center

955 Germantown Pkwy, Cordova, TN 38018 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 240 certified beds · (901) 754-1393 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (901) 754-1393 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 12 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
  • its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)

One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.

A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.

3/5
CMS overall
3 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 3 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 2 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 2 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Urgent care / clinic
1172 Vickery Ln · (901) 757-0095 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
Walgreens0.7 mi
9028 Walnut Grove Rd · (901) 754-3945 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
Kroger2.0 mi
676 N Germantown Pkwy · (901) 756-8908 · Call to confirm hours
Park
9424 Macon Rd · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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 4 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 1 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

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

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 increased6.5%14.0%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight2.2%6.1%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.1%0.7%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.4%1.8%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.0%13.8%6.5%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury1.1%3.4%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened13.5%17.2%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication23.8%31.7%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine96.7%94.5%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers8.3%5.0%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control24.2%20.0%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table12.6%16.8%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.6%1.7%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine80.4%79.8%79.4%typical
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission33.7%22.6%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit18.5%11.2%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.181.671.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days2.671.561.80worse

* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.

§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.

CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

41.6% 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 152 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

41.6%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
12.3%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
34.8%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.61U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.25hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.26hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.10hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 34.8% 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 69 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 0.61 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 88% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 24% 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
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF41.6%CMS range 33.2–51.351.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF12.3%CMS range 8.3–15.910.7%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 discharge34.8%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 discharge46.4%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 discharge20.3%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 identified98.8%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 setting95.8%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 discharge94.7%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 stay0.0%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 worsened0.6%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 hospitalization10.4%CMS range 7.4–15.67.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024worse than U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.341.02Oct 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

0.36
RN hours/ resident / day
1.26
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.99
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.61
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.31
RN hoursweekends
44.2%
Total nursing turnover
46.7%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 240 beds and averages 163.2 residents a day — about 68% occupied, or roughly 77 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 3.61 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.36 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.99 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 3.09 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.83 on weekdays — 19% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.38 to 0.31 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 44% 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 (2026-04-15)
7
at the previous standard inspection (2022-06-23)

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.

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.

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

  • Potential for harm · D2026-04-15 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on policy review, medical record review, and interview, the facility failed to complete an accurate Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for 3 of 33 (Resident #3, #147 and #181) residents reviewed for MDS discrepancies. The findings include: 1. Review of the facility's policy titled, RAI (Resident Assessment Instrument) -MDS 3.0 Completion, dated 1/1/2023, revealed .Residents are assessed using a comprehensive assessment process, in order to identify care needs . 2. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #3 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses including Encephalopathy, Osteoarthritis, Schizoaffective Disorder, and Hypothyroidism. Review of the quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE], revealed Resident #3 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 10, which indicated moderately impaired cognition. The MDS section O0110 was inaccurately coded to reflect Resident #3 received dialysis. Review of the Physician Orders dated 3/11/2026, revealed Resident #3 did not have an order…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-15 · 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 maintain emergency supplies at the bedside for 1 of 1 (Resident #11) sampled residents reviewed for tracheostomy (a surgically created opening in the neck to help with breathing) care. The findings include: 1. Review of the undated facility policy titled, Tracheostomy Care, Disposable Cannula [a small tube that is inserted into an open area of the body] revealed .The facility will ensure that residents who need respiratory care, including tracheostomy care and tracheal suctioning, is provided such care consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan and resident goals and preferences.Maintain a suction machine, a supply of suction catheters, correctly sized cannulas, and an ambu bag [a hand held device used to deliver air or oxygen to the lungs through a self-inflating bag in order support or replace breathing during an emergency] easily accessible for…

    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 · D2026-04-15 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
    Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
    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 that an account of all controlled medications was accurately reconciled for 1 of 10 medication carts (700 Hall Medication Cart #4). The findings include: 1. Review of the undated facility policy titled, Medication Administration, revealed .If medication is a controlled substance, sign the narcotic book .Correct any discrepancies and report to nurse manager . 2. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #43 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses including Traumatic Brain Injury, Paralytic Syndrome, Diabetes, and Anxiety. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], revealed Resident #43 scored a 12 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) assessment, which indicated she was moderately cognitively impaired. Review of the Physician's Orders dated 5/15/2025, revealed .Gabapentin [used for pain]100 MG [milligram] .Give 1 capsule by mouth three times a day .…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-04-15 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on policy review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to maintain and ensure the prevention and spread of infection when 4 of 8 (the Infection Preventionist Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) A and B, and Registered Nurse (RN) C) staff failed to use Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) during wound care, failed to use proper hand hygiene, and failed to clean reusable equipment between residents. The findings include: 1. Review of the undated facility policy titled, Medication Administration, revealed .Medications are administered by licensed nurses, or other staff who are legally authorized to do so .in a manner to prevent contamination of infection .Wash hands prior to administering medication per facility protocol and product . Review of the undated facility policy titled, Hand Hygiene, revealed .All staff will perform proper hand hygiene procedures to prevent the spread of infection to other personnel, residents, and visitors. This applies to all staff working in 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-03-17 · tag F0835 — failed to run the facility competently — isolated
    Administer the facility in a manner that enables it to use its resources effectively and efficiently.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on personnel file review, facility document review and interview, Administration failed to ensure that nursing services were provided by qualified personnel when the facility hired an imposter nurse (Imposter Nurse A) to function as a Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) using another LPN's (LPN C) Tennessee license on 2 separate occasions. Imposter Nurse A worked at the facility from 02/13/2023 to 06/06/2023 and was hired a second (2nd) time at the facility from 05/03/2024 to 06/24/2024. The findings include: 1st Hire: Review of Imposter Nurse A's personnel file revealed an employee application dated 02/08/2023 with a Social Security Number (SSN) that did not match the W-4 form dated 02/13/2023. Review of the I-9 form (Employment Eligibility Verification) used to verify the identity and legal authorization of individuals hired for employment in the United States dated 02/13/2023, revealed Imposter Nurse A's legal first and last name, along with a birth certificate and a valid Driver's license from another state. The last name used on the I-9 form was the same as the Driver's…

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

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2022-06-23 · 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 policy review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure food was stored, prepared, and served under sanitary conditions as evidenced by opened, unlabeled, undated food in the walk-in cooler and in the dry storage area, a mop lying in a bucket of dirty water near the stove during meal preparation, a dirty kitchen floor, a dirty deep fryer, a dirty convection toaster, a dirty food slicer, a scoop lying in the sugar bin, a Styrofoam cup lying in the raisin bran bin, carbon build-up on 2 sauté pans, opened, undated, unlabeled food items in the cooler, a dirty plate warmer, dirty 3-tiered cart, and a dirty tray line conveyor in the serving line area. The facility had a census of 133 with 105 of those residents receiving a tray from the kitchen. The findings include: Review of the facility's undated policy titled, .Sanitation Inspection, revealed .It is the policy of this facility .to ensure food service areas are clean, sanitary and in compliance with applicable state and federal regulations .All food services areas shall be kept clean, sanitary, free from…

    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 · E2022-06-23 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — pattern
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    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 Activities of Daily Living (ADL) assistance were provided related to nail care, skin care, and facial hair for 4 of 6 sampled residents (Resident #27, #41, #58, and #115) reviewed for ADLs. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, .Fingernails/Toenails, Care of, dated 10/2017, revealed .The proper care of fingernails .The purpose of this procedure is to clean the nail bed, to keep the nails trimmed, and to prevent infections. Trimmed and smooth nails prevent the resident from accidentally scratching and injuring his or her skin . Review of the facility's undated policy titled, .Activity of Daily Living ., revealed .A resident who is unable to carry out activities of daily living will receive the necessary services to maintain good .personal .hygiene . Review of the medical record, revealed Resident #27 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Heart Disease, Diabetes,…

    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 · E2022-06-23 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — pattern
    Ensure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on policy review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure enteral feedings with automatic flushes were infusing at the correct rate and failed to ensure enteral feedings and automatic flush bags were correctly labeled for 3 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #17, #65, and #94) reviewed for enteral feedings. The findings include: Review of the facility's undated policy titled, Care and Treatment of Feeding Tubes, revealed .Feeding tubes will be utilized according to physician orders .Open system feeding bags will be changed every 24 hours . Review of the medical record, revealed Resident #17 was admitted to facility on 2/24/2022 with diagnoses of Hemiplegia, Hemiparesis, Gastrostomy (a tube inserted into the stomach to administer liquid nourishment), and Cerebral Infarction. Review of the significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], revealed Resident #17 was assessed with a Brief Interview for Mental Status score (BIMS) of 1, which indicated Resident #17 was…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2022-06-23 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — pattern
    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 policy review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to provide the necessary respiratory care and services when a tracheostomy tubing condensation collection bag was lying on the floor, humidification bottles were on the floor, a dusty fan was blowing on a resident's tracheostomy, and there were no physician orders for oxygen for 4 of 4 sampled residents (Resident #23, #41, #44 and #45) reviewed for oxygen therapy. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, .Trach [Tracheostomy] Care, dated 10/2017, revealed .Our policy is to provide care for the resident with a tracheostomy present to prevent nosocomial infections . Review of the facility's policy titled, .Oxygen, dated 12/2017, revealed .Oxygen therapy is administered to the resident only upon the written order of a licensed physician . Review of the medical record, revealed Resident #23 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Respiratory Failure and Tracheostomy. 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-06-23 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
    Honor 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 Advanced Directive for 1 of 32 sampled residents (Resident #113) reviewed for Advanced Directives. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, admission Process: Advance Directives, dated 10/2017, revealed .protect the resident's rights and resident choice to advance life support initiatives upon admission/readmission .advance directives .will be signed prior to admission . Review of the medical record, revealed Resident #113 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Acute Respiratory Failure, Gastrostomy, Guillain-Barre Syndrome, and Convulsions. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], revealed Resident #113 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 6, which indicated severe cognitive impairment. Review of Resident #113's medical record, revealed there was no documentation the resident or their…

    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 · D2022-06-23 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on policy review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure the environment was free from accident hazards for 1 of 4 sampled residents (Resident #19) reviewed for accidents. The findings include: Review of the facility's undated policy titled, Accidents and Supervision, revealed .The resident environment remains as free of accident hazards as is possible .The facility shall establish and utilize a systematic approach to address resident risk and environmental hazards to minimize the likelihood of accidents . Review of the medical record, revealed Resident #19 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Diabetes, Heart Disease, Dementia, and Obesity. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE], revealed Resident #19 had moderately impaired cognition. Review of the Care Plan revised on 4/20/2022, revealed, .The resident's safety will be maintained . Observation in the Dining Room on 6/20/2022 at 9:18 AM and…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-06-23 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolated
    Ensure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
    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 follow the pharmacy recommendations in a timely manner 1 of 5 sampled residents (Resident #12) reviewed for unnecessary medications. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled POLICIES AND PROCEDURE Pharmacy Services, dated 6/1/2021, revealed The consultant pharmacist documents activities performed and services provided on behalf of the residents and the facility. A written or electronic report of findings and recommendations resulting from the activities as described above is given to the, attending physician, director of nursing, medical director and others as may be appropriate (e.g. [example] administrator, regional manager .) monthly. The facility has a process to ensure that the findings are acted upon . Review of medical record, revealed Resident #12 was admitted on [DATE], and readmitted on [DATE], with diagnoses of Femur Fracture, Diabetes, Acute Failure Kidney, Dementia and Urinary Retention. Review…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

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

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to AHAVA HEALTHCARE — 16 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 →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 3 of 52.4+0.6 vs chain
Health inspection 3 of 52.6+0.4 vs chain
Staffing 2 of 52.1-0.1 vs chain
Quality measures 2 of 53.2-1.2 vs chain
The other 15 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.4★, 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 / managerTypeRoleShareSince
CORDOVA HOLDCO LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 06/01/2019
BDV INV HOLDCO, LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST20%since 11/26/2024
ECM HOLDINGS LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST10%since 06/01/2019
NIEDERMAN, ANSHELIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 06/01/2019
DUBERT, DONNIIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/25/2025
NASH, DANAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/25/2025
EISEN, MENASHEIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/25/2025
PHILIPSON, GABRIELLEIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/25/2025
PHILIPSON, RAQUELIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/25/2025

CMS files one row per role, so the 12 rows in the source record cover these 9 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

3 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.

$20.5M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+12.8%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$2.4M
Related-party expense13% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 65%Medicare 11%Other / private 24%

This home reported $2.4M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 13% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

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

Cost & finances

$285per resident / day
operating cost
$8,672per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$327per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

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 445218. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-15, 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