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

Life Care Center Of Hixson

5798 Hixson Home Place, Hixson, TN 37343 · For profit - Corporation · 108 certified beds · (423) 842-0049 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
1 immediate-jeopardy citation$22,205 in federal fines
Insights

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

Worth asking about
  • inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
  • the CMS record shows $22,205 in federal fines (most recent 2026-05-02)
  • its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
  • about 19% 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.

1/5
CMS overall
1 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 1 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 3 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 3 of 5

Worth a closer look. This home's staffing and quality-measure ratings run 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself, and staffing on its payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.

Location & what’s nearby

Urgent care / clinic
5195 Battlefield Pkwy # 1099 · (423) 778-2900 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
5508 Hixson Pike · (423) 498-5900 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
Food City0.6 mi
5604 Hixson Pike · (423) 842-3500 · Call to confirm hours
Park
5401 School Dr · (423) 635-2085 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
5681 Old Hixson Pike · (423) 822-2488

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 3 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 2 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 4 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 4 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 rating4★
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 increased19.1%14.0%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight6.0%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 infection1.2%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 injury3.0%3.4%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened32.6%17.2%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication23.5%31.7%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine97.8%94.5%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers11.7%5.0%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control23.9%20.0%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table22.8%16.8%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication2.4%1.7%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine91.6%79.8%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission21.9%22.6%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit11.6%11.2%12.0%typical
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.861.671.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.681.561.80better

* 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.

66.9% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 309 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

66.9%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
9.7%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
70.5%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
1.06U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.60hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.40hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.06hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 70.5% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 61 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 1.06 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 97% 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 SNF66.9%CMS range 61.9–71.751.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF9.7%CMS range 7.1–12.910.7%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 discharge70.5%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 discharge82.0%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge59.0%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 identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge95.7%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 stay0.9%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 worsened6.4%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 hospitalization7.0%CMS range 4.8–10.77.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.291.02Oct 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

0.66
RN hours/ resident / day
1.00
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.50
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.17
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.49
RN hoursweekends
44.0%
Total nursing turnover
50.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 108 beds and averages 84.9 residents a day — about 79% occupied, or roughly 23 beds typically open. It usually has some room. 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 4.17 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.66 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.50 is at or above 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 3.64 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.38 on weekdays — 17% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.73 to 0.49 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 (2026-05-02)
4
at the previous standard inspection (2022-10-12)

Deficiencies are unchanged from the previous inspection. 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.

  • Immediate jeopardy · J2026-05-02 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    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

    Based on interview, record review, document review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #1 did not operate outside the scope of a CNA when he flushed Resident #125's peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) line (a PICC line is a long, thin, flexible tube inserted through a vein in the arm and threaded to a large vein near the heart. A PICC line provides long-term secure intravenous (IV) access for delivering medication, fluids, or nutrition, or for drawing blood, reducing the need for daily needle sticks). It was determined the facility's non-compliance with one or more requirements of participation had caused, or was likely to cause, serious injury, serious harm, serious impairment, or death to residents. The Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) was related to the State Operations Manual, Appendix PP, 483.25 F684, Quality of Care, at a scope and severity of J. The Immediate Jeopardy began on 04/27/2026. The IJ began on 04/27/2026 when CNA #1 flushed Resident #125's PICC line. The survey team notified the Executive Director (ED), 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 · F2026-05-02 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — widespread
    Ensure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to follow the menu serving size for the turkey and dumpling entree for the lunch meal on 04/29/2026 for 76 of 83 residents who received food from the kitchen. Findings included: The facility Diet Type Report dated 05/01/2026, listed the diet order of 83 residents and of the 83 residents, one resident was ordered finger foods, one resident was ordered a vegetarian diet, one resident was ordered a full liquid diet, and four residents received nothing by mouth. The facility Diet SpreadSheet for the lunch meal indicated residents were to receive a #6 scoop of chicken and dumplings for the lunch meal on 04/29/2026. An undated facility document titled Scoop Chart indicated a #6 scoop held 5 ounces (oz) and a #12 scoop held 2.5 oz. During the lunch meal tray line observation on 04/29/2026 at11:31 AM, [NAME] #9 used a ladle to serve one portion of regular turkey and dumplings and a green-handled scoop to serve one portion of mechanically altered and pureed turkey and dumplings. During an interview on 04/29/2026 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-05-02 · 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

    Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure 1 (Resident #81) of 25 sampled residents was assessed for their ability to self-administer their own medications. Findings included: A facility policy titled, Self-Administration of Medication, reviewed 09/15/2025, revealed, Procedure 1. If the resident desires to self-administer medication, the IDT [interdisciplinary team] will contact the resident's primary physician to make them aware of the resident request. 2. The IDT in consultation with the primary physician for the resident will conduct an assessment of the resident's cognitive, physical, and visual ability to carry out this responsibility. The policy specified, 4. The interdisciplinary assessment will be completed in the electronic medication record, and results review with the resident and/or responsible party. 5. After the IDT and primary physician review the assessment and determine the resident can safely self-administer, or self-administer and safely store medications at bedside, a physician's order will be…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-05-02 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolated
    Provide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure staff administered as needed pain medication when requested for 1 (Resident #123) of 3 observed for medication administration. Findings included: A facility policy titled, Pain Assessment and Management, revised 11/11/2025, revealed, Based on the comprehensive assessment of a resident, this facility must ensure that residents receive the treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive care plan, and the resident's choices related to pain management. An admission Record revealed the facility admitted Resident #123 on 04/22/2026. According to the admission Record, the resident had a medical history that included diagnoses of lung cancer and breast cancer. Resident #123's Care Plan Report included a focus area initiated 04/22/2026, that indicated the resident expressed pain/discomfort. Interventions directed staff to administer the resident's pain medications as ordered (initiated 04/22/2026). Resident #123's Order Summary Report, with active orders…

    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 · D2022-10-12 · tag F0636 — isolated
    Assess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
    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 Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Version 3.0 Manual, record review, and interview the facility failed to complete a discharge Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment timely for 1 resident (Resident #2) of 18 residents reviewed for MDS assessments. The findings include: Review of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Long-Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument 3.0 User's Manual, Version 1.17.1, dated October 2019, showed .Chapter 2: ASSESSMENTS FOR THE RESIDENT ASSESSMENT INSTRUMENT (RAI) .Discharge assessment .Must be completed .within 14 days after the discharge date . Resident #2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Deep Vein Thrombosis, Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease, Hyponatremia, Arthritis, Osteoporosis, Anxiety Disorder, and Depression. The resident was discharged from the facility on 7/12/2022. Record review revealed no documentation a discharge MDS assessment had been completed for Resident #2. During an interview on 10/12/2022 at 10:59…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-10-12 · 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 review of the Resident Assessment Instrument Manual 3.0 (RAI), medical record review, and interview, the facility failed to accurately complete a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for 1 resident (Resident #75) of 18 residents reviewed for MDS assessments. The findings include: Review of the RAI Manual 3.0 dated 10/2019 showed .the comprehensive assessment is considered complete on the date the RN [Registered Nurse] Coordinator indicates completion of the admission assessment .Assuming the resident does not have any significant changes in status or is not discharged from the facility the next assessment schedule is the Quarterly assessment . Resident #75 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including Alzheimer's Dementia, Type 2 Diabetes, Chronic Atrial Fibrillation. Diagnoses of Peripheral Artery Disease (PAD) was added on 9/16/2022. Review of a physician's progress note dated 9/16/2022 for Resident #75 showed a new diagnosis of PAD was added to Resident #75's…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-10-12 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy review, record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to implement an intervention to prevent falls for 1 resident (Resident #70) of 3 residents reviewed for falls. The findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Fall Management, reviewed 9/29/2022, showed .The facility will assess the resident .and will identify appropriate interventions to minimize the risk of injury related to falls .Implement interventions .consistent with a resident's .care plan .in order to eliminate the risk .reduce the risk of an accident .a care plan will be developed and initiated .on any residents assessed to be at risk for falls . Resident #70 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and readmitted on [DATE], with diagnoses including Fracture of Unspecified Part of Neck of Left Femur, Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage, Unspecified Cirrhosis of Liver, History of Falling, Muscle Weakness (Generalized), Unspecified Dementia, and Macular Degeneration. Review of a comprehensive care plan…

    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 · D2022-10-12 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
    Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy review, medical record review, and interview, the facility failed to maintain accurate and complete medical records for 1 resident (Resident #43) of 24 residents reviewed for accuracy of medical records. The findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Auditing and Monitoring of Medical Records, revised [DATE], showed .Auditing and monitoring of medical record documents is conducted to ensure medical records are complete and accurate and reflect current standards of documentation practices .Additional focused audits that may be done .may include, but are not limited to .Care plan .Audit for consistency between the MDS [minimum data set assessment] and the care plan .Monitor to ensure the care plan is current .Code Status . Audit for consistency between physician orders, advanced directives and any communication system for this that the facility might use . Resident #42 was admitted to the facility [DATE], with diagnoses including Dementia without Behavioral Disturbance, Type…

    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
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

$22,205 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $22,205 — penalty dated 2026-05-02

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to LIFE CARE CENTERS OF AMERICA — 194 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 1 of 53.4-2.4 vs chain
Health inspection 1 of 52.8-1.8 vs chain
Staffing 3 of 53.3-0.3 vs chain
Quality measures 3 of 54.5-1.5 vs chain
The other 193 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.4★, per CMS)
1 of 5Garden Terrace At Overland ParkOverland Park, KS 1 of 5Hammond-Whiting Care CenterWhiting, IN 1 of 5Life Care Center Of AndoverAndover, KS 1 of 5Life Care Center Of Cape GirardeauCape Girardeau, MO 1 of 5Life Care Center Of GrayGray, TN 1 of 5Life Care Center Of Mount VernonMount Vernon, WA 1 of 5Life Care Center Of RenoReno, NV 1 of 5Life Care Center Of Sierra VistaSierra Vista, AZ 1 of 5Life Care Center Of The WillowsValparaiso, IN 1 of 5Life Care Center Of TucsonTucson, AZ 1 of 5Life Care Center of Coeur d'AleneCoeur d'Alene, ID 1 of 5Life Care Center of ElkhornElkhorn, NE 1 of 5Life Care Center of Hilton HeadHilton Head Island, SC 1 of 5Life Care Center of OmahaOmaha, NE 1 of 5Life Care Center of PlainwellPlainwell, MI 1 of 5Life Care Ctr Of LawrencevilleLawrenceville, GA 1 of 5Rensselaer Care CenterRensselaer, IN 2 of 5Canon Lodge Care CenterCanon City, CO 2 of 5Darcy Hall Of Life CareWest Palm Beach, FL 2 of 5Desert Cove Nursing CenterChandler, AZ 2 of 5Evergreen Nursing HomeAlamosa, CO 2 of 5Garden Terrace Healthcare Center of HoustonHouston, TX 2 of 5Hallmark ManorFederal Way, WA 2 of 5Lane House, TheCrawfordsville, IN 2 of 5Life Care Center Of Altamonte SpringsAltamonte Springs, FL 2 of 5Life Care Center Of AthensAthens, TN 2 of 5Life Care Center Of BridgetonBridgeton, MO 2 of 5Life Care Center Of BrookfieldBrookfield, MO 2 of 5Life Care Center Of ClevelandCleveland, TN 2 of 5Life Care Center Of ColumbiaColumbia, SC 2 of 5Life Care Center Of Coos BayCoos Bay, OR 2 of 5Life Care Center Of Federal WayFederal Way, WA 2 of 5Life Care Center Of GrandviewGrandview, MO 2 of 5Life Care Center Of KirklandKirkland, WA 2 of 5Life Care Center Of Merrimack ValleyBillerica, MA 2 of 5Life Care Center Of Morgan CountyWartburg, TN 2 of 5Life Care Center Of PuyallupPuyallup, WA 2 of 5Life Care Center Of Red BankChattanooga, TN 2 of 5Life Care Center Of South Las VegasLas Vegas, NV 2 of 5Life Care Center Of TullahomaTullahoma, TN

Showing 40 of 193; lowest-rated first.

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 / managerTypeRoleSince
CERINO SAGRERO, JONATHANIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/04/2025
CRUM, SHIRLEYIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 04/22/2024
SOLOMON, JENNIFERIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 05/01/2019
CROSS, CINDYIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 09/01/2016
HENRY, TERRYIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 08/16/1999
THURMOND, JOANIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 09/01/2016
LIFE CARE CENTERS OF AMERICA, INC.OrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/04/2025
BRYCE, MARIANIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/04/2025
FLETCHER, TODDIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 08/24/2015
LAY, LISAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 08/24/2015
PRESTON, AUBREYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 11/27/2024
PRESTON, FORRESTIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/24/2015
SWANKER, RICHARDIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 08/24/2015
ZIEGLER, JAMESIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 08/24/2015

CMS files one row per role, so the 21 rows in the source record cover these 14 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

$13.8M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+7.8%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$2.4M
Related-party expense19% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 25%Medicare 30%Other / private 45%

This home reported $2.4M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 19% 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 2024. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

$416per resident / day
operating cost
$12,651per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$451per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2024). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in TN

Paying with Medicaid

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

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

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

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 445380. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-05-02, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

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

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

What to do next