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

Dyersburg Health And Rehabilitation Center

350 East Tickle Street, Dyersburg, TN 38024 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 123 certified beds · (731) 285-9710 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse/neglect citations on record (F0600, F0610) — most recent Jan 20206 immediate-jeopardy citations
Insights

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

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
Worth asking about
  • it has abuse, neglect, or exploitation citations (F0600, F0610) — most recent Jan 2020
  • inspectors cited 6 immediate-jeopardy problems — the most serious level
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (18) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
  • its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
  • nursing-staff turnover (57%) runs well above the national median (45%)
  • about 20% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies

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.

4/5
CMS overall
4 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 2 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 2 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★ 4/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
350 E Parkview St · (731) 334-5312 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
303 E Tickle St · (731) 285-1711 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
1480 US Highway 51 Byp E · (731) 287-1150 · Call to confirm hours
Park
101 Shelby Dr · (731) 288-2564 · 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 3 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 improved from 1 to 2 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

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

Overall rating2★
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 increased7.5%14.0%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight11.7%6.1%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.7%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.4%1.8%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms60.6%13.8%6.5%worse 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 injury3.2%3.4%3.3%typical
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened11.6%17.2%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication50.9%31.7%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine94.1%94.5%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers4.6%5.0%4.7%typical
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control19.2%20.0%21.2%typical
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table35.4%16.8%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication2.9%1.7%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine82.7%79.8%79.4%typical
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission21.5%22.6%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit12.5%11.2%12.0%typical
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.601.671.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days4.851.561.80worse

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.

44.2% 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 65 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

44.2%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
12.3%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
34.6%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.44U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.20hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.24hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
<0.01hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 34.6% 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 52 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.44 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 74% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 6% 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 SNF44.2%CMS range 34.4–56.651.5%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 8.8–16.810.7%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 discharge34.6%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 discharge34.6%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 discharge34.6%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 identified96.2%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 setting96.3%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 discharge100.0%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 stay2.6%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 worsened1.3%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 hospitalization7.5%CMS range 3.9–12.57.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.421.02Oct 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

0.56
RN hours/ resident / day
0.99
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.98
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.53
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.26
RN hoursweekends
57.1%
Total nursing turnover
30.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 123 beds and averages 69.3 residents a day — about 56% occupied, or roughly 54 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 3.53 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.56 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.98 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.12 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.70 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.68 to 0.26 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 57% is well above the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

2
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-12-11)
1
at the previous standard inspection (2021-06-30)

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.

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.

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

  • Immediate jeopardy · Lcited before2020-01-22 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — widespread
    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, Maintenance Supervisor job description, User's Information Manual, review of the maintenance supervisor's logbook documentation, review of the facility's census and condition (Centers of Medicare Medicaid Services (CMS) 672), observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure the environment was free from accident hazards when hot water temperatures were measured from 116 degrees Fahrenheit (F) to 144 degrees F in 48 of 63 resident rooms (room [ROOM NUMBER], #101, #102, #103, #104, #105, #106, #107, #108, #109, #110, #111, #112, #113, #114, #115, #116, #210, #211, #212, #214 #217, #218, #220, #301, #302, #304, #305, #306, #307, #308, #309, #310, #311, #313, #314 #315, #317, #318, #319, #400, #401, #402, #403, #404, #405, #406, and #407). The failure of the facility to maintain safe hot water temperatures placed the residents with access to these rooms in Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) (a situation in which the provider's noncompliance has caused, or is likely to cause serious injury, harm,…

    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
  • Immediate jeopardy · L2020-01-22 · tag F0835 — failed to run the facility competently — widespread
    Administer the facility in a manner that enables it to use its resources effectively and efficiently.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on policy review, Director of Maintenance job description, personnel file review, medical record review, and interview, Administration failed to administer the facility in a manner that enabled the facility to use its resources effectively and efficiently to attain and maintain the highest practicable well-being of the residents. Administration failed to provide oversight to monitor and provide a safe resident environment related to hot water temperatures, to provide training of staff to prevent potential burns of residents when water temperatures rose to dangerous levels, to ensure injuries of unknown origin which could be indicative of abuse were identified and investigated, to ensure resident sitters were screened and trained for abuse, and to ensure coordination of care between the interdisciplinary team (IDT) to identify and assess residents' nutritional status. Administration failed to continue implementation of the plan of correction after the complaint survey on 7/22/2019 where Abuse was cited at…

    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
  • Immediate jeopardy · L2020-01-22 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — widespread
    Set up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the Quality Assessment and Assurance policy, the Quality Assurance Plan, Administrator policy, medical record review, and interview, the Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) committee failed to ensure an effective QAPI program when the committee did not recognize an accident hazard risk with excessively hot water temperatures in residents' rooms. The QAPI committee failed to ensure Abuse policies and procedures were followed when injuries of unknown origin which could be indicative of abuse were not identified and investigated. The QAPI committee failed to ensure resident sitters were appropriately screened for abuse, had criminal background checks, and received abuse training. The QAPI committee failed to ensure residents' nutritional status was assessed, monitored, and appropriate interventions were implemented when residents sustained severe weight loss. The failure of the QAPI committee to ensure the facility identified the root cause of the risks associated with hazardous…

    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
  • Immediate jeopardy · J2020-01-22 · 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 policy review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure abuse screening, training, and background checks were conducted for 2 of 5 sitters (Sitter #1 and #2) which placed Resident #51 at risk for potential abuse. The facility's failure to perform screening, training, abuse registry checks, and background checks placed Resident #51 in Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) (a situation in which the provider's noncompliance with one or more requirements of participation has caused or is likely to cause serious injury, harm, impairment, or death to a resident). The Regional Administrator and the Regional Liaison was informed of the Immediate Jeopardy for F-600 on 1/21/2020 at 1:19 PM, in the Conference Room. The facility was cited F-600 at a scope and severity of J which is Substandard Quality of Care. An extended survey was conducted on 1/16/2020. The Immediate Jeopardy was removed onsite and was effective from 11/30/19 through 1/21/2020. An acceptable Removal Plan, which removed…

    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
  • Immediate jeopardy · J2020-01-22 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
    Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on policy review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to identify, thoroughly investigate, and protect vulnerable residents from further abuse for injuries of unknown source that could be indicative of abuse for 2 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #12 and #64) reviewed for abuse. The facility's failure to identify and thoroughly investigate bruising to Resident #12's left upper arm and posterior forearm and Resident #64's dark purple colored marks around the resident's neck, placed Resident #12 and #64 in Immediate Jeopardy (a situation in which the provider's noncompliance with one or more requirements of participation has caused or is likely to cause serious injury, harm, impairment, or death to a resident). The Administrator was notified of the Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) for F-610 on 1/17/2020 at 8:15 PM, in the Conference Room. The facility was cited at F-610 at a scope and severity of J, which is Substandard Quality of Care. An extended survey was conducted on 1/16/2020.…

    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
  • Immediate jeopardy · J2020-01-22 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on policy review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a Comprehensive Care Plan was developed for injuries of unknown origin and Care Plan interventions were followed for nutritional impairment for 3 of 28 sampled residents (Resident #12, #64, and #55) reviewed. The failure of the facility to develop a Comprehensive Care Plan for injuries of unknown origin that could be indicative of abuse with effective interventions and protect residents from further potential injury placed Resident #12 and #64 in Immediate Jeopardy. The failure of the facility to ensure Care Plan interventions were followed for nutritional impairment resulted in actual Harm when Resident #55 sustained severe weight loss. Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) is a situation in which the provider's noncompliance with one or more requirements of participation has caused or is likely to cause serious injury, harm, impairment, or death to a resident. The facility was cited F-656 at a scope and severity level of…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Actual harm · G2020-01-22 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on policy review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure Care Plans were revised to reflect the residents' current status for severe weight loss and pressure ulcers for 3 of 28 sampled residents (Resident #55, #33, and #74) reviewed. The failure of the facility to revise the care plans for severe weight loss with effective interventions to prevent further weight loss resulted in actual Harm when Resident #55 sustained severe weight loss. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Care Plans, Comprehensive Person-Centered, revised 12/2016, showed, .A comprehensive, person-centered care plan that includes measurable objectives and timetables to meet the resident's physical, psychosocial and functional needs is developed and implemented for each resident .The comprehensive, person-centered care plan will .Incorporate identified problem areas .Incorporate risk factors associated with identified problems .Identifying problem areas and their causes…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Actual harm · G2020-01-22 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolated
    Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
    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 the Registered Dietitian Service Agreement, policy review, job description review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents maintained acceptable parameters of nutritional status, and failed to accurately assess, implement, and monitor interventions to prevent severe weight loss for 1 of 12 sampled residents (Resident #55) reviewed for weight loss. The facility's failure to identify, assess, implement, and monitor interventions to prevent severe weight loss resulted in actual Harm when Resident #55 sustained severe weight loss. The findings included: Review of the facility's policy titled, Nutrition (Impaired)/Unplanned Weight Loss - Clinical Protocol, dated 9/2017, showed .The nursing staff will monitor and document the weight and dietary intake of residents in a format which permits comparisons over time .The staff and physician will define the individual's current nutritional status (weight, food/fluid intake, and pertinent laboratory values) 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 · Dcited before2025-12-11 · 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 provide an environment free of hazardous materials for 1 of 68 (Resident #52) sampled for accident hazards. The findings include: 1. Review of the facility revised policy titled, Environmental Services Safety Procedures, dated 3/1/2025, revealed .It is the policy of this facility to ensure general safety procedures.Staff will ensure equipment ( .cords, ladders, or chemicals) is properly stored and not left unattended in areas that are accessible to residents. 2. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #52 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses including Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Anxiety, and Seizures. Review of the annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], revealed Resident #52 did not have a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score completed and had modified independence for cognitive skills for daily decision making. Observation in Resident #52's room on…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-11 · 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 policy review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to follow physician's orders and provide care and services for oxygen therapy for 1 of 4 (Resident #7) sampled residents reviewed for respiratory care. The findings include: 1. Review of the undated facility policy titled, Oxygen Administration, revealed .Oxygen is administered to residents who need it, consistent with professional standards of practice.Oxygen is administered under orders of a physician. Review of the undated facility policy titled, Medication Administration, revealed .Medications are administered by licensed nurses.as ordered by the physician. 2. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #7 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses including Paraplegia, Epilepsy, Tracheostomy, Muscle Weakness, and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], revealed Resident #7 was severely cognitively impaired, coded for oxygen…

    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 · Dcited before2025-11-20 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
    Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure that residents received the necessary treatment and services consistent with professional standards of practice to promote healing when the facility failed to document wound care treatments for 1 of 3 (Resident #1) sampled residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The findings include: 1. Review of the facility policy titled, Wound Treatment Management, dated 12/3/2024, revealed .Wound treatments will be provided in accordance with physician orders .Treatments will be documented on the Treatment Administration Record . 2. Review of medical record revealed Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses including Osteomyelitis of Vertebra, Sacral and Sacrococcygeal Region, Pressure Ulcer of Sacral Stage 4, and Paraplegia. Review of the Physician's Order dated 5/11/2024, revealed .CLEAN L [left] GROIN W/ [with].SKIN PREP PERIWOUND MIX SSD [silver sulfadiazine a topical antibiotic]…

    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 before2021-06-30 · 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 ensure respiratory equipment was stored properly and covered for 4 of 7 sampled residents (Resident #13, #28, #41, and #136) reviewed for respiratory care and 2 of 2 nurses (Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #3 and #4) failed to provide proper respiratory care for 1 of 1 sampled resident (Resident #22) observed for tracheostomy care. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Administering Medications through a Small Volume (Handheld) Nebulizer, revised 10/2010, revealed .Store in a plastic bag with the resident's name and the date on it . Review of the medical record, revealed Resident #13 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses of Fracture of the Right Femur, Dementia, Anxiety, Osteoarthritis, Cerebral Infarction, Depression, Morbid Obesity, and Hypertension. Review of the Physician's Order dated 4/1/2021, revealed an order for CPAP (Continuous Positive Airway Pressure) at night 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 · E2020-01-22 · 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 policy review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to promote and enhance the residents' dignity when staff did not close the blinds when performing pressure injury treatments, did not knock on the residents' doors prior to entering the residents' room, and did not close the blinds when weighing a resident for 5 of 25 sampled residents (Resident #75, #30, #47. #71, and #23) reviewed. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Quality of Life--Dignity, revised 8/2009, showed .Each resident shall be cared for in a manner that promotes and enhances quality of life, dignity, respect and individuality .Residents shall be treated with dignity and respect at all times .Staff will knock and request permission before entering residents' rooms . 1. Observation in the resident's room on 1/12/2020 at 2:30 PM, showed Registered Nurse (RN) #2 entered Resident #75's room without knocking or verbally announcing her presence. Observation in the residents' shared room on 1/13/2020 at 8:20 AM, showed Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #9 entered Resident #30 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2020-01-22 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — pattern
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to provide and document treatments for arterial wounds for 1 of 1 sampled residents (Resident #47) reviewed with arterial wounds (wounds caused by poor blood perfusion and circulation to the lower extremities). The findings include: Review of the medical record, showed Resident #47 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Unspecified Open Wound Right Ankle, Diabetes, Diabetic Neuropathy, Hypertension, Atherosclerotic Heart Disease, Anxiety, Peripheral Vascular Disease, and Dementia. Review of the significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], showed Resident #47 had 1 venous/arterial wound. Review of the Care Plan revised 11/13/2019, showed, .Right Ankle Arterial wound .Interventions .administer .treatments as ordered . Review of the Physician's Orders, showed the following treatment orders: 1.Order Date .9/13/2019 .clean open area to right outer ankle with wound cleanser and apply xeroform [occlusive non…

    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 before2020-01-22 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — pattern
    Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of the Prevention and Treatment of Pressure Ulcers: Quick Reference Guide, policy review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to document ordered treatments and accurately assess pressure ulcers for 4 of 6 sampled residents (Resident #23, #32, #56, and #74) reviewed for pressure ulcers. The findings include: Review of the Prevention and Treatment of Pressure Ulcers: Quick Reference Guide, provided by the NPAUP (National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel) dated 2014, showed, .Stage I: Non blanchable [skin does not lose redness when pressure applied] Erythema [redness of skin]. Intact skin with non-blanchable redness of a localized area usually over a bony prominence .Stage II: Partial Thickness Skin Loss .presenting as a shallow open ulcer with a red pink wound bed .May also present as an intact or open/ruptured serum-filled blister .Stage III: Full Thickness Skin Loss .subcutaneous fat may be visible but bone, tendon, or muscle are not exposed. Slough [dead tissue]…

    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 · E2020-01-22 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — pattern
    Dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
    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 properly store garbage in a covered dumpster on 5 of 11 days (1/15/2020, 1/17/2020, 1/18/2020, 1/20/2020, and 1/22/2020) of the survey. The findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Food-Related Garbage and Refuse Disposal, revised 10/2017, showed, .Outside dumpsters provided by garbage pickup services will be kept closed and free of surrounding litter . Observation at the facility's outside dumpsters on 1/15/2020 at 1:51 PM and 7:45 PM, showed the gate of the fence surrounding the dumpsters opened, 2 bags of trash hanging out of left side of the large dumpster, gloves and loose trash lying on the ground around the dumpsters. Observation at the facility's outside dumpsters on 1/17/2020 at 7:15 PM, showed the gate of the fence surrounding the dumpsters opened, 3 garbage bags lying on the ground on the left side of the large dumpster, 1 trash bag hanging out of the left side of the large dumpster, and 1 trash bag hanging out of the top of the large dumpster. Observation of the facility's dumpsters…

    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 · D2020-01-22 · tag F0554 — isolated
    Allow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
    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 assess 2 of 2 sampled residents (Resident #36 and Resident #37) for medication self-administration. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Self-Administration of Medications, revised 12/2016, showed, .Residents have the right to self-administer medications if the interdisciplinary team has determined that it is clinically appropriate and safe for the resident to do so .As part of their overall evaluation, the staff and practitioner will assess each resident's mental and physical abilities to determine whether self-administering medications is clinically appropriate for the resident .The staff and practitioner will periodically (for example, during quarterly MDS [Minimum Data Set] reviews) reevaluate a resident's ability to continue to self-administer medications . 1. Review of the medical record, showed Resident #36 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses of Chronic Obstructive…

    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 · D2020-01-22 · 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 the medical record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments were completed accurately for antipsychotic medication use, pressure injuries, and anticoagulant medication use for 3 of 28 sampled residents (Resident #21, #23, and #30) reviewed. The findings include: 1. Review of the medical record, showed Resident #21 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Dementia with Behavioral Disturbance, Major Depressive Disorder, and Hypertension. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], showed Resident #21 had received antipsychotic medications for 7 days of the past 7 days (10/11/2019-10/17/2019). Review of the Physician's Orders dated October 2019, showed there was no order for antipsychotic medications for Resident #21. Review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) dated October 2019, showed no antipsychotic medications were administered to Resident #21. During an interview conducted on 1/17/2020 at 1:02 PM, the MDS…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

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 CHAMPION CARE — 22 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 4 of 52.2+1.8 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 52.1+1.9 vs chain
Staffing 2 of 52.3-0.3 vs chain
Quality measures 2 of 53.0-1.0 vs chain
The other 21 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.2★, per CMS)
1 of 5Burlington Health and Rehabilitation CenterBurlington, WI 1 of 5Lyonsview Health And Rehabilitation CenterKnoxville, TN 1 of 5Madison Health and Rehabilitation CenterMadison, WI 1 of 5Manahawkin Health And Rehabilitation CenterManahawkin, NJ 1 of 5Suring Health and Rehab CenterSuring, WI 1 of 5Waters Edge Health and Rehabilitation CenterKenosha, WI 2 of 5Avondale Health and Rehabilitation Center, LLCHumboldt, TN 2 of 5Beloit Health And Rehabilitation CenterBeloit, WI 2 of 5Eastview Health and Rehabilitation CenterAntigo, WI 2 of 5Highlands Health And Rehabilitation CenterMemphis, TN 2 of 5Muskego Health and Rehabilitation CenterMuskego, WI 2 of 5North Ridge Health and Rehabilitation CenterManitowoc, WI 2 of 5Oconto Health and Rehab CenterOconto, WI 2 of 5Riverside Health And Rehabilitation Center LLCTrenton, NJ 2 of 5Sheridan Health and Rehabilitation CenterKenosha, WI 3 of 5Monroe Health And Rehabilitation CenterMadisonville, TN 3 of 5Patriot Health and Rehabilitation CenterParis, TN 4 of 5Nu Roc Health and Rehabilitation CTRLaona, WI 4 of 5Okeena Health And Rehabilitation Center LLCDyersburg, TN 4 of 5St Ann Health and Rehabilitation CenterMilwaukee, WINot rated (Special Focus)Medical Suites at Oak Creek (The)Oak Creek, WI

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
THE BAY AT HIGHLANDS HOLDCO LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 06/01/2022
BL CAPITAL GROUP HOLDINGS LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST10%since 06/01/2022
LEGACY SNF OPCO HOLDINGS LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST13%since 06/01/2022
LEGACY SNF OPCO HOLDINGS TRUSTOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST13%since 06/01/2022
TN2 OPCO HOLDINGS LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST25%since 06/01/2022
MCGOVERN, BENJAMINIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 01/23/2023
RUVEL, MENACHEMIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 06/01/2022
WEINBERG, YISROELIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 06/01/2022
CHAMPION CARE LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 06/01/2022

CMS files one row per role, so the 11 rows in the source record cover these 9 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

6 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.

$9.5M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+5.2%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.8M
Related-party expense20% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 72%Medicare 13%Other / private 15%

About 72% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $1.8M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 20% 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

$307per resident / day
operating cost
$9,325per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$324per 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 445497. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-12-11, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

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

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

What to do next