Hardin County Nh
935 Wayne Road, Savannah, TN 38372 · Government - County · 73 certified beds · (731) 925-4954 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- inspectors cited 2 immediate-jeopardy problems — the most serious level
- the CMS record shows $67,490 in federal fines (most recent 2025-01-23)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (1/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 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 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 1 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 1 to 2 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
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 | 25.8% | 14.0% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 15.8% | 6.1% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 3.2% | 0.7% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 4.3% | 1.8% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 14.3% | 13.8% | 6.5% | typical for the 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 | 5.3% | 3.4% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 32.8% | 17.2% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 43.0% | 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 | 9.3% | 5.0% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 2.3% | 20.0% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 23.5% | 16.8% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.6% | 1.7% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 92.9% | 79.8% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 31.6% | 22.6% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 10.1% | 11.2% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.72 | 1.67 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.34 | 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.
§ 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.
50.4% 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 154 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 34.4% 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 64 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.44 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 74% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 9% 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 | 50.4%CMS range 41.7–57.5 | 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 | 11.9%CMS range 9.1–16.1 | 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 | 34.4% | 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 | 40.6% | 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 | 42.2% | 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 | 98.5% | 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 1.0% | 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 | 3.0% | 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 | 7.7%CMS range 5.1–12.7 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.02 | 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 73 beds and averages 37.0 residents a day — about 51% occupied, or roughly 36 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.77 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.68 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.47 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.96 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.10 on weekdays — 22% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.85 to 0.28 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 44% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
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.
11 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2024-02-14 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on policy review, medical record review, facility investigation review, observations, and interview, the facility failed to ensure each resident's environment was safe and each resident received adequate supervision to prevent accidents and hazards for 1 of 1 (Resident #8) residents reviewed for smoking, and 1 of 5 (Resident #98) reviewed for wandering and elopement. On 2/7/2024 Resident #8, a moderately cognitively impaired, legally blind resident, was observed to be smoking unsupervised in the smoking area. Resident #8 had a lit cigarette and burn marks on his clothing. On 9/21/2022, Resident #98, a vulnerable, severely cognitively impaired resident exited the facility without staff knowledge or supervision through a malfunctioning facility door, down the ramp and into the facility's back parking lot, and when bleach wipes were found in Resident #40's, a cognitively impaired resident, room. The facility failed to ensure fall interventions were implemented in accordance with the care plans for 2 of 6…
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.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2024-02-14 · 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 review of the Blood Glucose Monitoring User Guide, policy review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure practices to prevent the potential spread of infection were maintained when multi-use blood glucose meters (a device used to check blood sugar levels with the use of a blood sample) were not cleaned and disinfected with facility required bleach cleansing wipes to prevent cross-contamination of bloodborne pathogens for 4 of 5 sampled residents (Residents #1, #14, #25, and #33) reviewed for blood glucose monitoring. Observations on 2/7/2024 and 2/8/2024 revealed Licensed Practical Nurses (LPN) #1 failed to clean and disinfect the multi-use blood glucose meters before and after use on each resident in accordance with recommendations and facility policy, failed to perform hand hygiene, and failed to don gloves during medication administration. Observations on 2/7/2024 revealed LPN #2 failed to clean and disinfect the blood glucose meters before use on each…
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.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2025-01-23 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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, facility investigation, observation, and interview, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision and assistance to prevent fall accidents for 1 of 8 residents (Resident #3) reviewed for falls and failed to perform fall assessments per facility policy for 6 of 8 residents (Resident #5, #12, #14, #22, #26, and #187) reviewed for falls. The facility failed to implement the care plan intervention of staying with Resident #3 while toileting on 8/13/2024, when Resident #3 fell from the toilet and sustained an oblique (neither parallel nor at right angle, slanting) impaction fracture (bone fracture when pressure is applied to both ends of a bone, causing it to split and jam together) of the proximal tibial metaphysis (the enlarged lower part of the shinbone that meets the knee joint) and a nondisplaced transverse impaction fracture of the fibular neck (broken bone still aligned in the narrow part of bone just below the knee joint), resulting in Actual Harm…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-02-19 · tag F0644 — isolatedCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on policy review, medical record review, and interview, the facility failed to resubmit a Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) after the addition of a new mental illness diagnosis for 2 of 2 (Resident #17 and #21) sampled residents reviewed for PASRR. The findings include: 1. Review of the facility policy titled, Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR), dated 10/1/2024, revealed .PASRR requires that.all applicants to a Medicaid-certified nursing facility be evaluated for serious mental illness.A negative Level I screen permits admission to proceed and ends the PASARR [PASRR] process unless a possible serious mental disorder . arises later.An individual is considered to have a serious mental illness.Diagnosis.anxiety disorder.psychotic disorder; or another mental disorder that may lead to a chronic disability.If a significant change in status assessment (SCSA) occurs for an individual known or suspected to have a mental illness.a referral to the State Mental Health.for a possible…
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 · D2026-02-19 · 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 policy review, medical record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure staff were administering medications per Physician's Orders for 1 of 5 (Resident #5) sampled residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The findings include: 1. Review of the facility policy titled, Administration of Drugs, dated 12/2008, revealed .give medications per physician's orders. 2. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #5 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses including Presence of Artificial Larynx, Hemiplegia (paralysis affecting one side of the body), Depression, Anxiety and Fractured Fibula. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE], revealed Resident #5 scored a 14 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) assessment, which indicated he was cognitively intact. Review of the Physician's Order dated 12/30/2025, revealed .Nystatin [used to treat yeast infections] External Powder 100000 UNIT/GM [gram].Apply to perineal [area between the genitals 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.
- Potential for harm · F2025-01-23 · tag F0851 — widespreadElectronically submit to CMS complete and accurate direct care staffing information, based on payroll and other verifiable and auditable data.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on review of facility policy, Quarterly Payroll Based Journal (PBJ) review and interview, the facility failed to report PBJ for Quarter 1 of 2024 (October 1, 2024- December 31, 2024). The findings include: 1. Review of the undated facility policy titled, Reporting Direct-Care Staffing Information (Payroll-Based Journal), revealed, .Direct-care staffing and census information will be reported electronically to CMS though the Payroll-Based Journal System (PBJ) system . 2. Review of the Quarterly Payroll Based Journal (PBJ) dated 10/1/2024 - 12/31/2024, revealed, .Failed to Submit Data for the Quarter . During an interview on 1/23/2025 at 3:38 PM, the Administrator confirmed the facility failed to submit the PBJ data, by the required deadline, for the first quarter of 2024.
- Potential for harm · E2025-01-23 · 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
Based on facility policy, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure food was stored, handled, prepared, and served under sanitary conditions when 1 of 6 (Dietary [NAME] B) dietary staff failed to sanitize the thermometer after each use, and when the facility failed to ensure the deep fryer and the cooking stove eyes were clean. The facility had a census of 39 with 39 of those residents receiving a tray from the kitchen. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy titled, Food Preparation Area, dated 5/2013, .Our facility will maintain a clean, sanitary, and safe food preparation area . 1. Observation in the Kitchen on 1/21/2025 at 4:09 PM and 1/23/2025 at 8:28 AM, revealed the deep fryer had dark brown cooking grease with brown crumbs floating on top of the cooking oil and the cooking stove eyes had black build up. 2. Observation in the Kitchen on 1/22/2025 at 10:52 AM, revealed Dietary [NAME] B took the temperature of the broccoli, placed the thermometer into the roast beef and failed to clean the thermometer prior to taking the temperature of the roast…
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 before2025-01-23 · 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 policy review, medical record review, and interview, the facility failed to conduct care plan conference with the resident and/or family representative for 1 of 12 (Resident #28) sampled residents reviewed for care plan conferences. The findings include: 1. Review of the facility policy titled, Care Plan Meeting dated 12/2024, revealed .A Care Plan meeting is conducted to demonstrate to the resident, family, and resident representative that the organization is dedicated to the provision of person-centered care to achieve the resident's highest practicable well-being and outcomes of the resident's ongoing health and safety concerns .MDS Coordinator or designee will set the appointment date and time with the resident, family/representative .The Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) will introduce themselves and explain their roles on the care team. The IDT will obtain additional pertinent information regarding the resident's clinical status, prior living conditions, and the presence of family/local support to…
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 · D2024-02-14 · 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
Based on policy review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to maintain or enhance residents' dignity and respect during dining when 5 of 11 staff members (Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #1, #2, #3, #6, and Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #5) failed to knock and/or announce themselves before entering a resident's room during dining, stood to assist with dining, and failed to use courtesy titles when addressing residents. The findings include: 1. Review of the facility's policy titled, Dignity, dated 7/2018, revealed .Each resident shall be cared for in a manner that promotes and enhances quality of life, dignity, respect and individuality .Residents shall be treated with dignity and respect at all times .Staff will knock and request permission before entering residents' rooms .Staff shall speak respectfully to residents at all times, including addressing the resident by his or her name of choice and not labeling or referring to the resident by his or her room number, diagnosis, or care needs .Staff shall promote dignity and assist person served as needed by .sitting…
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 before2024-02-14 · 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 policy review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to update and revise the Care Plan for Physical Restraints, Smoking Safety Screen, and Wandering Risk Assessments for 1 of 1 sampled resident (Resident #8) reviewed. The findings include: 1. Review of the facility's policy titled Care Plan, dated 5/2013, revealed .An individual care plan for activity is developed and maintained for each resident . 2. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #8 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and readmitted on [DATE], with diagnoses of Cognitive Communication Deficit, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Tobacco Use, Dementia with Behavioral Disturbance, Depression and Legal Blindness. Review of the most current Wandering Risk Assessment revealed the last assessment was done on 8/17/2023. There was no documentation the Wandering Risk Assessment was conducted after 8/17/2023 and quarterly. Review of the quarterly MDS dated [DATE], revealed Resident #8 had a BIMS score 13…
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 · D2024-02-14 · 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
Based on policy review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were properly stored and labeled when expired medications were observed in 1 of 1(Hall 1 Medication Cart) medication storage areas. The findings include: 1. Review of the facility's policy titled Storage of Medications, revised 5/2013 revealed .Drugs and biologicals shall be stored in a safe and orderly manner .No discontinued, outdated, or deteriorated drugs or biologicals are available for use in this facility . 2. Observation at Hall 1 Medication Cart on 2/8/2024 at 3:39 PM, revealed 2 opened bottles of Latanoprost Ophthalmic Solution 0.005% (percent) (eyedrops). One of the bottles of Latanoprost Ophthalmic Solution 0.005% had an opened date of 12/26/2023 and a discard by 2/6/2024 date, the other bottle of Latanoprost Ophthalmic Solution 0.005% had an opened date of 12/25/2023 and no use by date on the bottle. During an interview on 2/8/2024 at 3:46 PM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #1 was asked how long are eyedrops good for use after they have been opened. LPN #1 stated, .30 days .…
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
$67,490 in federal fines across 2 penalties. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.
- $14,505 — penalty dated 2025-01-23
- $52,985 — penalty dated 2024-02-14
- Medicare payment denial — starting 2024-02-18 for 52 days
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 / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HARDIN COUNTY GENERAL HOSPITAL | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 04/02/1952 |
| EDMONDSON, JAMES | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 10/18/2021 |
| HUGHES, LEIGH ANN | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 07/01/2005 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 4 rows in the source record cover these 3 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.
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 445372. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-02-19, 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.