Quality Center For Rehabilitation And Healing LLC
932 Baddour Parkway, Lebanon, TN 37087 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 280 certified beds · (615) 444-1836 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- a high number of inspection citations overall (19) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (1/5)
- about 18% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
- its last standard health inspection was over 3 years ago — the star rating may not reflect current conditions
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 1 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 1 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 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 fell from 2 to 1 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 11.2% | 14.0% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 4.3% | 6.1% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.7% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.5% | 1.8% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 4.0% | 13.8% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 4.6% | 3.4% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 11.7% | 17.2% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 31.9% | 31.7% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 94.5% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 2.1% | 5.0% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 13.8% | 20.0% | 21.2% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.2% | 1.7% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 95.3% | 79.8% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 24.5% | 22.6% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 5.2% | 11.2% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.37 | 1.67 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.68 | 1.56 | 1.80 | better |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
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.
56.6% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 161 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 66.2% 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 154 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 0.36 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 62% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 10% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 56.6%CMS range 48.3–63.9 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.9%CMS range 7.4–13.3 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 66.2% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 64.3% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 47.4% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 98.7% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 1.5% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.8%CMS range 5.0–11.5 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.20 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 280 beds and averages 261.0 residents a day — about 93% occupied, or roughly 19 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.45 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.44 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.99 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.85 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.70 on weekdays — 23% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.48 to 0.33 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 45% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 3 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
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.
19 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 8 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · G2023-08-10 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide 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, hospital record review, facility document review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to adequately monitor and implement appropriate interventions for 1 of 1 (Resident #21) resident who was exhibiting self-mutilating behaviors. Between 6/23/2023 and 7/17/2023, Resident #1 began chewing on his fingers which resulted in infection and subsequent partial amputations on 7/18/2023. The facility's failure to adequately monitor and implement interventions resulted in harm. The findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #21 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and readmitted on [DATE], with diagnoses which included Acquired Absence of Right Leg Below Knee (right below the knee amputation), Dementia, Anxiety Disorder, Diabetes Mellitus, and Partial Traumatic Transphalangeal (usually involves the four fingers in similar or slightly varying degrees) Amputation of Unspecified Fingers (Resident #21 had amputations to varying degrees to all fingers of both…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-07 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — isolatedEnsure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
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 National Library of Medicine article review, Black Box Warning review, the facility's Licensed Practical Nurse Job Description review, policy review, facility documentation review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure all nursing staff possessed the competencies and skill sets necessary to provide nursing and related services to meet the residents' needs safely for 2 of 4 (Resident #11 and #12) sampled residents. The findings include: 1. Review of the article from the National Library of Medicine titled, Midazolam, dated 7/6/2025, revealed, .Midazolam [Versed] is a short-acting benzodiazepine [central nervous system depressant drugs that slow brain activity, used for short relief of anxiety and sedation prior to medical procedures] frequently used for.sedation.Midazolam also provides anxiolysis [relieving anxiety].Adverse event risk, including respiratory depression, hypotension [decrease blood pressure].Monitoring vital signs, including blood…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-07 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy review, Job Description review, medical record review, and interview the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services that assured a system of records of receipt and disposition of all controlled drugs in sufficient detail to enable an accurate account of medication destruction for 4 of 4 (Resident #8, #10, #11, and #12) sampled residents reviewed for drug destruction. The findings include: 1. Review of a facility policy titled, Emergency Medications, dated 4/2007, revealed .The facility shall maintain a supply of medications typically used in emergencies.The emergency medication supply will include medications that are needed in providing treatment in the immediate need per physician's order.Accessing the emergency medications supply requires 2 nurses to be present to witness the dispensing/wasting of the medication when required. Review of undated facility policy titled, Controlled Substances, revealed, .The facility shall comply with all laws, regulations, and other requirements…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-10-02 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy review, medical record review, Emergency Medical Services (EMS) record review, Hospital record review, Facility investigation review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure an injury of unknown origin was reported to the appropriate agencies immediately, but not later than 2 hours after the injury was noted, for 1 of 11 (Resident #2) sampled residents reviewed for abuse. The findings include: 1. Review of the undated facility policy titled, Abuse Reporting, revealed, .All personnel.are required to immediately report any incident or suspected incident of resident abuse, neglect.including injuries of an unknown source.The incident will be reported to the Abuse Coordinator.FEDERAL REGULATION (42 CFR 483.13) requires the reporting of alleged violations of abuse.including injuries of unknown origin, immediately to the Abuse Coordinator.and to appropriate state agencies in accordance with state law.The facility must report abuse.within 24 hours after the reasonable cause threshold…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-08-10 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on facility policy review, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to provide effective maintenance services to maintain a safe and homelike environment for 1 of 4 (Smoking Area #1) outside smoking areas where residents had independent access to smoke throughout out the day. Failure to provide effective maintenance services resulted in peeling paint to 7 outside benches and 1 bench with broken board to the seated area. The findings include: Review of the facility's undated policy titled, Quality of Life - Homelike Environment revealed, .Residents are provided with a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment and encouraged to use their personal belongings to the extent possible .the characteristics of the facility that reflect a personalized, homelike setting . Observations and interview in Smoking Area #1 on 8/7/2023 at 12:55 PM, revealed 5 residents smoking independently. Physical Therapy Assistant (PTA) #1 stated independent smokers come out to smoke whenever they want to smoke. Observations in Smoking Area #1 on 8/7/2023 at 1:00 PM, revealed 7 wood benches…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-08-10 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
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 implement interventions on care plans for 2 of 60 (Resident #9 and #106) residents reviewed. The findings include: Review of the undated facility policy titled, Comprehensive Care Planning, revealed, .The facility will develop a comprehensive, person-centered care plan for each resident that included measurable objectives to meet a resident's medical, nursing, mental and psychosocial needs .The care plan will describe the services that are to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being .When making decisions about the care plan .Determine whether the problem needs an intervention .establish which items need further assessment or review . Review of the medical record revealed Resident #9 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Cerebral Infarction, Essential Hypertension,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-08-10 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — isolatedEnsure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
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 interviews, the facility failed to ensure nursing staff was competent when one (1) nurse failed to administer medications ordered by the physician to 1 of 3 (Resident #365) residents reviewed. The findings include: Review of the facility's undated policy titled, Medication Administration, revealed, .Orders for medications and treatments will be consistent with principles of safe and effective order writing .Orders that cannot be administered due to pharmacy delay or between delivery times and that cannot be retrieved from any in-house medication dispenser will be communicated to the physician/provider for further instruction . Review of the medical record revealed Resident #365 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Non-ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction (type of heart attack that happens when the heart is not getting enough oxygen), and Atherosclerotic Heart Disease of Native Coronary Artery (build up of plaque in the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-08-10 · tag F0813 — isolatedHave a policy regarding use and storage of foods brought to residents by family and other visitors.
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 store a resident's personal food in a safe manner for 1 of 25 (Resident #9) residents reviewed with personal refrigerators. The findings include: Review of the undated facility policy titled, Foods Brought in by Family/Visitors, revealed .The facility will permit liberalized diets as much as possible and clinically advised. Nursing staff and/ or the Dietician must be aware of and approve all foods/drinks that are brought to a resident by all visitors . Review of the undated facility policy titled, Personal Refrigerators, Use of, revealed .It is the goal of the facility to provide optimal care .comfort of its residents. The facility will also respect residents' dignity, freedom of choice and individuality to the extent possible. If a resident/representative requests the use of a personal refrigerator for their room in the facility, this request will be reviewed by the Interdisciplinary Care Plan Team in an…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2019-05-08 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy review, manufacturer guidelines, observation, facility maintenance reports and interview, the facility failed to ensure clean and sanitary conditions of the main kitchen ice machine, food contact surfaces (dishes), failed to maintain the dish machine in proper working order to prevent cross contamination and failed to date, label and monitor refrigerated and dry foods. The findings include: Review of facility policy, Ice Machines and Ice Storage, undated revealed .Ice machines will be used and maintained to assure a safe and sanitary supply of ice . Review of manufacturer guidelines titled, Scotsman Ice systems, revealed .Clean or replace air filter and clean the air condenser .It is the users responsibility to keep the ice machine and storage bin in a sanitary condition .Without human intervention, sanitation will not be maintained . Observation of the ice machine on 5/7/19 at 8:52 AM, in the kitchen revealed green debris on the ice. Interview with the Dietary Manager on 5/7/19 at 8:53…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-05-08 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolatedKeep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
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 secure the personal privacy and confidentiality of 1 narcotic book containing narcotic sign out sheets for Resident #48. The findings include: Review of facility policy, Confidentiality of Information, undated revealed .Our facility shall treat all resident information confidentially and shall access protected information only as necessary . Medical record review revealed Resident #48 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Acute Hematogenous Osteomyelitis Right Femur and Chronic Pain. Medical record review of the Order Summary Report revealed .OxyCODONE HCI [hydrochloride] Tablet 10 MG (milligrams), Give 1 tablet by mouth every 6 hours as needed for pain related to ACUTE HEMATOGENOUS OSTEOMYELITIS, RIGHT FEMUR . Observation of the medication cart on 5/8/19 at 4:40 PM on the Skilled Hall revealed the medication cart was unattended and the narcotic sign out book was opened…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2018-05-03 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of the manufacturer's recommendations, observation and interview, the facility dietary department failed to operate the dish machine in safe operating condition. Findings include: Review of the manufacturer's recommendations revealed the minimum wash temperature was 140 degrees Fahrenheit (F) and the minimum rinse temperature was 120 degrees F. Observation on 4/30/18 at 11:38 AM in the dietary department revealed the resident mid-day meal tray line was in progress. Further observation revealed the dietary staff were manually washing dishes, used for breakfast, in the 3 compartment sink. Observation on 5/1/18 at 2:50 PM of 7 consecutive cycles of the dish machine in the dietary department dish room, included 5 racks with resident meal service trays and 2 racks with plate domes and bases, revealed the wash temperature went from 130 degrees F and dropped to 126 degrees F. Further observation revealed the rinse temperature was 128 degrees F for all 7 racks processed and the temperature gauge never moved. Further observation revealed the dietary staff stored the contents…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 8 citations
- Potential for harm · E2018-05-03 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
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 observation, interview, and medical record review, the facility dietary department failed to ensure the resident received food preferences and failed to receive food at a safe and appetizing temperature. Findings include: Observation on 5/2/18 at 7:30 AM of the resident morning meal service revealed the tray line was in progress. Further observation revealed Dietary Staff #1 obtaining food temperatures at 7:42 AM prior to the service of the B Hall tray cart. Further observation revealed the following temperatures in degrees Fahrenheit (F). The sausage [NAME] was 152.1 degrees, ground sausage was 178 degrees, and pureed sausage was 181 degrees; scrambled eggs were 187 degrees, pureed eggs were 168 degrees, and fried eggs were 151 degrees; oatmeal was 146 degrees, and the gravy was 168 degrees. Observation on 5/2/18 revealed the following: At 7:55 AM - 2 carts with a total of 21 resident trays and a test tray for B Hall left the dietary department. At 8:00 AM - 2 carts arrived to B hall and nursing staff…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2018-05-03 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy review, medical record review, observations, and interview, the facility failed to ensure dignity for 2 of 10 residents (Resident #193 and Resident #209) with catheters. Findings include: Review of the facility policy Dignity undated revealed, .Demeaning practices and standards of care that compromise dignity will not be allowed, for example: helping the resident to keep urinary catheter bags covered . Medical record review revealed Resident #193 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Unspecified Atrial Fibrillation, Essential Hypertension, Major Depressive Disorder, Gross Hematuria, and Obstructive and Reflux Uropathy, unspecified. Medical record review of the 14 Day Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #193's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 6 indicating severe cognitive impairment. Observations of Resident #193 in the resident's room on 5/1/18 at 9:55 AM, at 10:50 AM and at 12:10 PM revealed the resident's catheter drainage…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2018-05-03 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to keep the call light within reach for 1 of 16 residents (Resident #242) observed on the 400 hall. Findings include: Review of facility policy, Call Bell System undated, revealed, .It is the policy of the facility to make every effort to respond to the residents' requests and needs .The call bell will be placed within reach when the resident is in bed or sitting in a chair in the room . Medical record review revealed Resident #242 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Parkinson's Disease, Iron Deficiency Anemia and Muscle Weakness. Medical record review of the Quarterly Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] revealed Resident #242 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 15 indicating the resident was cognitively intact. Continued review revealed the resident required extensive assist of one person to transfer or walk in the room. Observations on 5/2/18 at 1:24 PM and at 3:10 PM…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2018-05-03 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy review, medical record review, and interview ,the facility failed to ensure care plans were updated for 3 of 68 residents (Resident # 164, Resident # 209, and Resident #253) reviewed. Findings include: Review of facility policy MDS/Care Plans undated, revealed .Goals and objectives are reviewed and/or revised: when there has been a significant change in the resident's condition .when the desired outcome has and/or has not been achieved .when the resident has been readmitted to the facility from the hospital .at least quarterly . Medical record review revealed Resident #164 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Sepsis, Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm, Urinary Tract Infection, Essential Hypertension, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Enterocolitis due to Clostridium Difficile (C-Diff). Medical record review of the 14 Day Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #164 to have a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 3 indicating severe…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2018-05-03 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
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 store wound cleanser in a locked medication cart for 1 of 18 residents (Resident #201) reviewed on the 500 hall. Findings include: Review of facility policy Storage of Medications - General undated, revealed .Medication rooms, carts and medication supplies are locked or attended by person with authorized access . Medical record review revealed Resident #201 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Hemorrhage from Respiratory Passages, Tracheostomy Status and Dysphagia. Medical record review of a Physician's Order dated 3/9/18 revealed to cleanse the tracheostomy stoma site with wound cleanser and apply a dry dressing every day shift and every 2 hours as needed. Observation on 4/30/18 at 9:00 AM and at 12:28 PM in Resident #201's room revealed a bottle of wound cleanser on the bedside table. Observation and interview with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2018-05-03 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy review, observation, interview, and medical record review, the facility failed to follow transmission based precautions and hand washing protocols between residents during meal tray pass on the 200 hall and South skilled hall; failed to change a PICC (peripherally inserted central catheter) dressing timely for 1 of 5 sampled residents (Resident #109) requiring dressing changes. Findings include: Review of facility policy Isolation - Categories of Transmission - Based Precautions revised January 2012 revealed, .Standard Precautions shall be used when caring for residents at all times regardless of their suspected or confirmed infections status. Transmission - Based precautions shall be used when caring for residents who are documented or suspected to have communicable diseases or infections that can be transmitted to others .Contact Precautions for residents known or suspected to be infected with microorganisms that can be transmitted by direct contact with the resident or indirect…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2018-05-03 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — isolatedKeep all essential equipment working safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on review of the manufacturer's recommendations, observation and interview, the facility dietary department failed to maintain the dish machine in safe operating condition, and failed to maintain the dish room door in a safe manner. Findings include: Review of the manufacturer's recommendations revealed the minimum wash temperature was 140 degrees Fahrenheit (F) and the minimum rinse temperature was 120 degrees F. Observation on 4/30/18 at 11:38 AM in the dietary department revealed the resident mid-day meal tray line was in progress. Further observation revealed the dietary staff were manually washing dishes, used for breakfast, in the 3 compartment sink. Interview with the Dietary Manager on 4/30/18 at 11:38 AM in the dietary department revealed the dish machine sanitizer solution would not prime, therefore not dispense, in the dish machine and the service company had been contacted. Observation on 5/1/18 at 2:50 PM of 7 consecutive cycles of the dish machine in the dietary department dish room, included 5 racks with resident meal service trays and 2 racks with plate domes…
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.
- No harm found · C2018-05-03 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — widespreadEnsure 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of nutritional guidelines, menu review, and interview, the facility menu failed to meet nutritionally adequate standards for 3 of 4 weeks in the menu cycle. Findings include: Review of the Nutritional Guidelines and Menu Checklist for Residential and Nursing Home, 2014, revealed 5 or more servings of fruit and vegetables should be served daily. Further review revealed food high in fat should be used sparingly. Review of the 4 week cycle menu revealed the following: Week 1 Sunday Supper was Hamburger on Bun, French Fries, Fudge Round, and Lettuce/Tomato/Onion. Week 1 Monday Lunch was Tuna Salad on Bun, Tator Tots, Soup, Donuts. Week 1 Tuesday Lunch was Corn Dog Nuggets, French Fries, Cookie. Week 1 Friday Lunch was Grilled Chicken Breast, Macaroni Salad, Waffle Fries. Supper was Pizza, Tossed Salad (no tomato), Fruit. Week 1 Saturday Lunch was Hot Dog on Bun, Chili, Saltine Crackers, Tator Tots, Donut. Week 3 Sunday Lunch was Fish Sandwich, French Fries, Macaroni Salad, Cookie. Week 3 Wednesday…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to CARERITE CENTERS — 34 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 1 of 5 | 3.6 | -2.6 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 2.8 | -0.8 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 2.2 | -0.2 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 1 of 5 | 4.8 | -3.8 vs chain |
The other 33 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.6★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| QUALITY TN VENTURES LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | 100% | since 07/01/2016 |
| EINHORN, NEAL | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 07/01/2016 |
| FRIEDMAN, MARK | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 07/01/2016 |
| EME, IJAGHA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/01/2022 |
| GRISHAM, JULIE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 08/14/2018 |
| WASHER, STEPHANIE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/08/2021 |
| MD FRIEDMAN FAMILY 2017 TRUST | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/01/2016 |
| NEAL EINHORN FAMILY 2017 TRUST | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 08/29/2017 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 13 rows in the source record cover these 8 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
3 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $5.5M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 18% 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
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in TN
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Tennessee Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 445154. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2023-08-10, 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.