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

Wharton Nursing Home

878-880 West Main Street, Pleasant Hill, TN 38578 · Non profit - Corporation · 62 certified beds · (931) 277-3518 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse/neglect citations on record (F0600, F0609) — most recent May 2024Behavioral-health or dementia-care citation — no harm found (F0758)3 immediate-jeopardy citations$69,885 in federal fines
Insights

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

Worth asking about
  • it has abuse, neglect, or exploitation citations (F0600, F0609) — most recent May 2024
  • inspectors cited 3 immediate-jeopardy problems — the most serious level
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (18) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • the CMS record shows $69,885 in federal fines (most recent 2024-05-24)
  • its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
  • its last standard health inspection was over 2 years ago — the star rating may not reflect current conditions

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

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

1/5
CMS overall
1 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 1 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 2 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 3 of 5

Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 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 — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★ 4/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
15 Walker Hill St · (931) 484-1100 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
168 Obed Plz Ste 108 · (931) 484-5109 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
Kroger8.8 mi
265 Highland Sq · (931) 456-7646 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 3 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 1 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 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.

Overall rating1★
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 increased25.2%14.0%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight2.7%6.1%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder2.6%0.7%0.9%worse
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection3.8%1.8%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms3.9%13.8%6.5%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury0.0%3.4%3.3%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened19.5%17.2%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication21.6%31.7%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine87.5%94.5%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers6.0%5.0%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control30.3%20.0%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table31.0%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 vaccine85.6%79.8%79.4%typical
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission21.2%22.6%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit13.0%11.2%12.0%typical
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.341.671.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days2.071.561.80worse

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

On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.

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

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

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

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

63.4% 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 285 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

63.4%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
9.9%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
64.2%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
not reportedno hours filed
Therapy hours / resident / day

Met the expected recovery: 64.2% 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 81 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: not reported. This home filed no therapist hours at all in its payroll data for this quarter. That is a gap in what it reported, and we do not read it as an absence of therapy — the homes that file nothing here include ones that discharged hundreds of Medicare rehab patients in the very same period, who plainly received therapy from someone. Because we cannot tell a home that under-reports from one that genuinely provides little, this home is left out of the comparison above rather than scored at zero. Ask it directly how many therapist hours a rehab resident gets, and on which days.

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 SNF63.4%CMS range 58.0–67.751.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF9.9%CMS range 7.6–14.110.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge64.2%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge59.3%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 discharge60.5%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 identified99.0%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 settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay2.1%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.0%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 hospitalization6.1%CMS range 3.6–9.47.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.901.02Oct 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

0.44
RN hours/ resident / day
1.97
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.79
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.20
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.28
RN hoursweekends
Total nursing turnover
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 62 beds and averages 59.9 residents a day — about 97% occupied, or roughly 2 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. 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 4.20 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.44 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.79 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.74 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.39 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.51 to 0.28 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

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

5
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2024-02-22)
3
at the previous standard inspection (2021-06-30)

Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 2 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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

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

  • Immediate jeopardy · J2024-05-24 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
    Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy review, medical record review, and interview, the facility failed to protect the resident's right to be free from physical and verbal abuse by a family member for 1 of 8 (Resident #2) sampled residents reviewed for abuse . Resident #2, a vulnerable and severely cognitively impaired resident, was observed being mentally and physically abused by Family member #2 on 4/23/2024. The facility's failure to protect the resident's right to be free from physical and verbal abuse placed Resident #2 and other residents in the facility in an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) situation, (A condition in which facility noncompliance with one or more conditions of participation has resulted in or is likely to result in serious injury, harm, impairment, or death to a resident and must be immediately corrected). The facility's failure to protect Resident #2's right to be free from abuse had the potential to impact all residents in the facility. The facility census was 44. The Facility Administrator was notified of…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Immediate jeopardy · J2024-05-24 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy review, medical record review, facility documentation review, and interview, the facility failed to report an allegation of abuse to the appropriate agencies within the required timeframe for 1 of 8 (Resident #2) sampled residents reviewed for abuse. Resident #2, a vulnerable and severely cognitively impaired resident, was observed being mentally and physically abused by Family member #2 on 4/23/2024. The facility's failure to report an allegation of abuse placed Resident #2 and other residents in the facility in an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) situation, (A condition in which facility noncompliance with one or more conditions of participation has resulted in or is likely to result in serious injury, harm, impairment, or death to a resident and must be immediately corrected). The facility's failure to report an allegation of abuse had the potential to impact all residents in the facility. The facility census was 44. The Facility Administrator was notified of the IJ on 5/22/2024 at 11:34 AM,…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Immediate jeopardy · J2024-05-24 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of facility policy, medical record review, and interviews, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan and implement appropriate interventions for 1 of 4 (Resident #2) sampled residents reviewed for care plans. On 4/23/2024, Resident #2's family member was observed being verbally and physically abusive toward Resident #2 and the facility failed to develop interventions to ensure Resident #2 was safe and monitored for his psychosocial wellbeing, latent injuries, and ensure all staff members were aware Family member #2 was not allowed in the facility following an abuse incident by a Family member. The facility's failure to develop a comprehensive care plan and implement appropriate interventions following an abusive incident by a Family member placed Resident #2 and all other residents in the facility in an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) situation, (a condition in which facility noncompliance with one or more conditions of participation has resulted in or is likely to result in serious…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Actual harm · G2024-02-22 · 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, medical record review, observation and interview, the facility failed to prevent accidents related to falls for 1 resident (Resident #45) of 5 residents reviewed for falls when effective and appropriate interventions to prevent falls were not implemented which resulted in actual harm to Resident #45. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Accidents and Supervision, updated on 8/21/2023, showed .The resident environment will remain as free of accident hazards as is possible. Each resident will receive adequate supervision and assistive devices to prevent accidents. This includes .Identifying hazards(s) and risk(s) .Implementing interventions to reduce hazard(s) and risk(s) .Monitoring effectiveness and modifying interventions when necessary .The facility shall establish and utilize a systematic approach to address resident risk .to minimize the likelihood of accidents .Both the facility-centered and resident-directed approaches include evaluating hazard and…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2024-02-22 · tag F0700 — widespread
    Try different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, observation and interview, the facility failed to complete side (bed) rail assessments for the risk of entrapment and failed to obtain consents for side rails for 6 residents (Residents #1, #34 #5, #23, #25 and #45) of 6 residents reviewed for side rails. The findings include: Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Cognitive Communication Deficit, Quadriplegia and Bed Confinement Status. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], showed Resident #1 had moderate cognitive impairment and required extensive assistance of 2 staff for bed mobility, hygiene and dressing and total dependence on staff for toileting. Review of Resident #1's medical record showed no entrapment risk safety assessments or consent for siderails. During an observation on 2/12/2024 at 12:40 PM, Resident #1 was listening to the radio while lying in bed and 1/4 bilateral upper side rails were in place on the bed. No visible gaps between the matress…

    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 · F2024-02-22 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — widespread
    Set up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on policy review, review of prior survey results, medical record review, facility documentation review, observation and interview, the facility's Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) program failed to take effective actions plans to ensure appropriate interventions were put into place, and to monitor the effectiveness for falls for 1 resident (Resident #45) of 5 residents reviewed for falls. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Quality Assurance & Performance Improvement (QAPI) Plan, dated 9/21/2023, showed, .The QAPI plan .is designed to establish and maintain an organized facility-wide program that is data-driven and utilizes a proactive approach .Objectives of the QAPI plan include .establish a facility-wide process to identify opportunities of improvement through continuous attention to quality of care, quality of life and resident safety . Review of prior survey findings, the facility was previously cited a deficiency of F689 on a complaint survey on 6/6/2023 at a…

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

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-02-22 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy review, document review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure medical information was not visible for 5 residents (Residents #1, #3, #4, #22, and #46) of 55 residents observed. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Promoting-Maintaining Resident Dignity, dated 8/21/2023, showed .All staff members are involved in providing care to residents to promote and maintain resident dignity .Maintain resident privacy . Review of a facility document titled, Uplands Village Skilled and Long-Term Care admission Handbook, dated 10/1/2018, showed .Residents .To be treated with consideration, respect and full recognition of his/her dignity . Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Cognitive Communication Deficit, Quadriplegia and Bed Confinement Status. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], showed Resident #1 had moderate cognitive impairment and required extensive…

    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 · Dcited before2024-02-22 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to offer hand hygiene assistance to residents prior to meals for 3 residents (Resident #44, #156, and #157) of 3 residents observed on 1 of 3 hallways observed for meal tray distribution. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Hand Hygiene, updated on 8/21/2023, showed .POLICY .will perform proper hand hygiene procedures to prevent the spread of infection .Hand hygiene is indicated and will be performed under the conditions listed in, but not limited to, the attached hand hygiene table .Hand Hygiene Table .Residents are offered hand hygiene prior to meals .Either Soap and Water or Alcohol Based Hand Rub . Resident #44 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Alzheimer's Disease, and Cognitive Communication Deficit. Review of Resident #44's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], showed the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS)…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2021-06-30 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
    Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy review, medical record review, observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) performed care within the scope of practice when she handed 1 resident (Resident #32) a cup of medications for the resident to take of 50 residents observed during the initial tour of the facility. The findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Medication Administration, dated 1/13/2020, showed .Medications are administered by licensed nurses, or other staff who are legally authorized to do so in this state .and In accordance with professional standards of practice . Resident #32 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Congestive Heart Failure, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Atrial Fibrillation, and Muscle Weakness. Observation and interview on 6/28/2021 at 9:54 AM, in Resident #32's room revealed a medication cup with approximately 5 medications in the cup sitting on the resident's overbed table. The resident stated 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2021-06-30 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
    Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to maintain proper infection control procedures during a dressing change for 1 resident (Resident #32) of 2 residents reviewed for dressing change. The findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Infection Control, dated 1/13/2020, showed .It is a policy of this facility to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable disease and infections .All staff shall wash their hand .after handling contaminated objects . Medical record review showed Resident #27 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Fracture of shaft Left tibia, Heart Failure, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Muscle Weakness, Reduced Mobility, and Abnormalities of Gait. Medical record review of a skin evaluation dated 6/22/2021 showed Resident #27 had a…

    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 · D2021-06-30 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure 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

    Based on facility policy review, observation and interview, the facility failed to store a medication at the proper temperature in 1 of 3 medication carts and failed to dispose of expired medications and supplies available for resident use in 1 of 2 medication storage rooms. The findings include: Review of the facility policy, Storage and Expiration Dating of Medications, Biologicals Syringes and Needles, updated 10/28/2019, revealed .Facility should ensure that medications and biologicals are at their appropriate temperatures .should destroy or return all discontinued, outdated/expired or deteriorated .in accordance with .guidelines .laws . Observation with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #3, on 6/29/2021 at 8:12 AM, on the 200 hallway revealed 1 opened bottle of acidophilus (probiotic) stored on the medication cart, with medication bottle labeled to refrigerate after opening. During an interview on 6/29/2021 at 8:12 AM, LPN #3 confirmed the medication had not been refrigerated and was available for resident use. Observation with LPN #1 on 6/30/2021 at 10:20 AM, in the Oxygen…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-02-12 · tag F0638 — isolated
    Assure that each resident’s assessment is updated at least once every 3 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 medical record review, review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS), and interview, the facility failed to complete a quarterly assessment for 1 resident (#2) of 16 residents reviewed for MDS of 16 sampled residents. The findings include: Medical record review revealed Resident #2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Cerebrovascular disease, Essential Hypertension, Dysphagia, Muscle Weakness, Gastro-Esophageal Reflux Disease, Hyperlipidemia, Generalized Anxiety Disorder, Dementia with Behavioral Disturbance, Vascular Dementia with Behavioral Disturbance, Major Depressive Disorder, Insomnia, Hemiplegia and Hemiparesis, Insomnia, Post Traumatic Seizures, and Delusional Disorders. Medical record review revealed the annual MDS was dated 10/11/18. Continued review revealed a quarterly MDS had not been completed for 1/2019. Interview with the MDS coordinator, Licensed Practical Nurse #1 confirmed the MDS for 1/2019 had not been completed as scheduled .the system didn't pull it forward .it…

    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 · D2019-02-12 · tag F0655 — isolated
    Create and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review and interview the facility failed to implement a baseline care plan for 1 resident (#148) related to vision impairment of 16 residents sampled. The findings include: Medical record review revealed Resident #148 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Legal Blindness, Other Reduced Mobility, and Acquired Absence of Right Leg Below the Knee. Interview with Resident #148's family on 2/10/19 at 12:12 PM, in the resident's room, revealed she required assistance with meal set up and food preparation due to her vision impairment. Medical record review of Resident #148's interim care plan revealed no identified risk, goal, or interventions in place for vision impairment. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 2/10/19 at 2:44 PM, in the training room, confirmed no interim care plan was initiated for Resident #148's vision impairment.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-02-12 · tag F0732 — isolated
    Post nurse staffing information every day.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on facility policy, observation, and interview the facility failed to complete and post the direct care daily staffing roster for 1 of 3 staffing rosters posted for 2-10-19. The findings include: Review of the facility policy Posting Direct Care Daily Staffing Numbers, revised 7/2016, revealed .1. Within two (2) hours of the beginning of each shift, the number of Licensed Nurses .and the number of unlicensed nursing personnel .directly responsible for resident care will be posted in a prominent location .and in a clear and readable format . Observation on 2/10/19 at 10:28 AM, in the Wellness Center Nurse's station, revealed the direct care staffing roster posted was dated 2/9/19. Interview with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #3 on 2/10/19 at 10:28 AM, in the Wellness Center Nurse's station, confirmed the direct care roster had not been updated and posted for 2/10/19. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 2/10/19 at 2:20 PM, in the admission nurse's office, confirmed the staffing roster should be posted and updated daily. Further interview confirmed the staffing…

    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.

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-02-12 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
    Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy review, observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure expired over the counter medications were not available for resident use in 1 medication storage room of 2 medication storage rooms observed. The findings include: Facility policy review of the Storage of Medications policy revised 4/2017 revealed . The facility shall not use .outdated .drugs .All such drugs shall be .destroyed . Facility policy review of the Administering Oral Medications policy revised 10/2010 revealed .Check the expiration date on the medication . Observation with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #2 on [DATE] at 10:00 AM, in the Wellness Medication Storage room [ROOM NUMBER], revealed 1 bottle of Citracal Calcium Supplement 500 International Units with Calcium 400 milligram had expired on 11/2018 and was available for resident use. Interview with LPN #2 on [DATE] at 10:00 AM, in the Wellness Medication Storage room [ROOM NUMBER], confirmed the Citracal Calcium Supplement was expired and available for…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-02-12 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolated
    Ensure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy review, medical record review, and interview, the facility failed to act on a pharmacy recommendation with a rationale for declining the recommendation for 1 resident (#20) of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications, of 16 residents reviewed. The findings include: Review of a facility policy Medication Regimen Review with an effective date of 12/1/17, revealed . 7.1 The attending Physician should document in the residents' health record that the identified irregularity has been reviewed and what, if any action had been taken to address it . 7.2.1 If the attending Physician has decided to make no change in the medication, the attending Physician should document the rationale in the resident's health record . Medical record review revealed Resident #20 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including Diabetes Mellitus Type 2, Abnormalities of Gait and Mobility, Weakness, Recurrent Depressive Disorder, Delusional Disorder, and Anxiety Disorder. Medical record review of a Pharmacy…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2019-02-12 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolated
    Implement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review, and interview, the facility failed to provide an evaluation and rationale for the continued use of an as needed (PRN) antianxiety medication beyond 14 days for 1 Resident (#44) of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications of 16 residents sampled. The findings include: Medical record review revealed Resident #44 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with the diagnoses including Pneumonia, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Unspecified Symptoms Involving Cognitive Function and Awareness, and Cognitive Communication Deficit. Medical record review of the Pharmacist Consultation Report dated 1/20/19 revealed a recommendation to discontinue the PRN Xanax (an anti-anxiety medication) or provide rationale for the continued use beyond 14 days. Continued review revealed an evaluation or rationale was not provided for the continued use of the Xanax. Medical record review of the 5 day minimum data set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #44 scored a 10 on…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2019-02-12 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy review, observation and interview, the facility failed to properly store laboratory specimens and medications separately in 1 medication refrigerator in 1 medication storage room of 2 medication storage rooms and refrigerators observed. The findings include: Facility policy review of the Storage of Medication Requiring Refrigeration reviewed and revised 1/2019 revealed .Refrigerators used for the storage of medications and biologicals .Used solely for the purpose of storing medications and biological that require refrigeration .Not used for food, blood or blood products or specimen storage . Observation with Licensed Practical Nurse #2 on 2/12/18 at 10:00 AM, in the Wellness Medication Storage room [ROOM NUMBER], revealed 1 undated, unlabeled urinalysis specimen cup with urine in a clear unsealed plastic bag stored in the medication refrigerator. Interview with LPN #2 on 2/12/18 at 10:00 AM, in the Wellness Medication Storage room [ROOM NUMBER], confirmed the urine was not properly…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

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

Fines & penalties

$69,885 in federal fines across 2 penalties.

  • $30,722 — penalty dated 2024-05-24
  • $39,163 — penalty dated 2024-02-22

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

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
UPLANDS VILLAGEOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 06/29/2012
MURNER, HERSCHELIndividualCONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEE; W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 10/01/2017
SMITH, CYNTHIAIndividualCONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEE; W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 10/01/2017
CHITIYO, GEORGEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 08/26/2020
CLEMOW, DERRICKIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 04/25/2020
EVERETT, BARBARAIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 05/27/2016
HANSON, HOLLYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 02/25/2017
MITCHELL, TOMIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 02/24/2018
OVERLOCK, MARCIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 05/19/2018
PEEPLES, SUSANIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 05/19/2018
SMITH, BARBARAIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 09/17/2019

CMS files one row per role, so the 16 rows in the source record cover these 11 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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.

$9.4M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-41.4%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 17%Medicare 11%Other / private 72%

A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

$314per resident / day
operating cost
$9,557per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$222per 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 445510. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-02-22, 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