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

Soddy-Daisy Health Care Center

701 Sequoyah Road, Soddy-Daisy, TN 37379 · For profit - Corporation · 134 certified beds · (423) 332-0060 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (423) 332-0060 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 8 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
Worth asking about
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
  • about 30% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies

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

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

3/5
CMS overall
3 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 3 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 2 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Urgent care / clinic
9448 Dayton Pike · (423) 778-8500 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
121 Harrison Ln · (423) 332-5124 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
9823 Dallas Hollow Rd · (423) 332-5050 · Call to confirm hours
Park
9817 Dayton Pike · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
9835 W Ridge Trail Rd · (423) 332-3544

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 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 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 3 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 rating3★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased7.9%14.0%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight10.1%6.1%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.3%0.7%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection1.4%1.8%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.0%13.8%6.5%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury3.8%3.4%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication26.5%31.7%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine98.6%94.5%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers4.6%5.0%4.7%typical
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control13.4%20.0%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table29.7%16.8%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication1.2%1.7%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine88.1%79.8%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission27.2%22.6%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit8.1%11.2%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days0.921.671.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.251.561.80better

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

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

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

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

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

52.3% 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 146 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

52.3%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
12.1%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
68.8%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.37U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.20hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.14hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.03hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 68.8% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 61 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.37 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 63% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 16% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF52.3%CMS range 45.1–58.051.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF12.1%CMS range 8.7–16.410.7%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 discharge68.8%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 discharge75.4%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 discharge60.7%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 identified97.8%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 setting92.2%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final dischargenot 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 stay3.3%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened1.1%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 hospitalization8.5%CMS range 5.0–13.57.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.031.02Oct 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

0.60
RN hours/ resident / day
1.13
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.96
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.69
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.33
RN hoursweekends
47.7%
Total nursing turnover
50.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 134 beds and averages 92.3 residents a day — about 69% occupied, or roughly 42 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.69 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.60 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.96 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 3.32 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.84 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.71 to 0.33 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 48% 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

5
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-11-17)
2
at the previous standard inspection (2022-05-04)

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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

  • Potential for harm · E2025-11-17 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — pattern
    Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of facility policy, observation, and interview, the facility failed to maintain privacy curtains in a clean and sanitary condition, failed to maintain resident rooms in good repair, and in a homelike condition for12 rooms (Rooms #209, #210, #212, #119, #121, #120, #123, #124, #127, #125, #126, and #128) of 71 rooms observed for homelike condition. The findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Maintenance Service, 12/2009, revealed .Maintenance service shall be provided to all areas of the building, grounds, and equipment.Functions of maintenance personnel include.Maintaining the building in compliance with current federal, state, and local laws, regulations, and guidelines.Maintaining the building in good repair.Establishing priorities in providing repair service.Providing routinely scheduled maintenance services to all areas.The Maintenance Director is responsible for maintaining the following records/reports.Inspection of building. Review of the facility policy titled, Safe and…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-11-17 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility policy review, medical record review, and interview, the facility failed to accurately complete a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment after a fall for 1 resident (Resident #8) of 3 residents reviewed for falls. The findings include:Review of the facility policy titled, RAI [Resident Assessment Instrument] - MDS [Minimum Data Set] 3.0 Completion, dated 3/2025, revealed .Residents are assessed, using a comprehensive assessment process, in order to identify care needs and to develop an interdisciplinary care plan.According to federal regulations, the facility conducts initially and periodically a comprehensive, accurate and standardized assessment of each resident's functional capacity, using the RAI specified by the State.Review of medical record revealed Resident #8 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Cerebral Infarction, Alzheimer's Disease, Dementia with Behaviors, Diabetes, Osteoarthritis, Chronic pain, Dysphagia, and Muscle weakness.Review of the event note 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-11-17 · 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, observation, and interview, the facility failed to implement the care plan related to fall interventions for 1 resident (Resident #8) of 19 residents reviewed for care plans.The findings include:Review of the facility policy titled, Comprehensive Care Plans, dated 3/3/2025, .It is the policy of this facility to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, to meet a resident's medical, physical, mental, and psychosocial needs.The care planning process will include an assessment of the resident's strengths and needs.The comprehensive care plan will describe, at a minimum, the following.The services that are to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being.Resident specific interventions that reflect the resident's needs.as indicated. Review of the facility policy titled, Falls, dated 6/2025, revealed .[Facility] strives to maintain a hazard free…

    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 · D2025-11-17 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of facility policy, review of the medical record, observation, and interview, the facility failed to revise a comprehensive care plan for fall interventions for 1 resident (Resident #8) of 19 residents reviewed for care plans.The findings include:Review of the facility policy titled, Comprehensive Care Plans, dated 3/3/2025, .It is the policy of this facility to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, to meet a resident's medical, physical, mental, and psychosocial needs.The care planning process will include an assessment of the resident's strengths and needs.The comprehensive care plan will describe, at a minimum, the following.The services that are to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being.Resident specific interventions that reflect the resident's needs.as indicated. Review of the facility policy titled, Falls, dated 6/2025, revealed .[Facility] strives to maintain a hazard…

    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 · D2025-11-17 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
    Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of facility policy, medical record review, and interview, the facility failed to accurately complete a Medication Administration Record (MAR) for 1 resident (Resident #8) of 6 residents review for MAR documentation.The findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Documentation in Medical Record, dated 7/1/2025, revealed .Each resident's medical record shall contain an accurate representation of the actual experiences of the resident and include enough information to provide a picture of the resident's progress through complete, accurate, and timely documentation.Principles of documentation include, but are not limited to.Documentation shall be factual, objective, and resident centered.False information shall not be documented.Record descriptive and objective information based on first-hand knowledge of the assessment, observation, or service provided.Documentation shall be accurate, relevant, and complete. Review of the medical record revealed Resident #8 was admitted to the facility…

    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 · F2022-05-04 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure 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 review, observation, and interview the facility failed to maintain a sanitary environment in the kitchen, with the potential to affect 88 of 89 residents dining in the facility. The findings include: Review of the facility policy titled, Food Safety-Food Service Manager's Responsibility, dated 2013, showed .The food service manager is responsible for providing safe foods to all individuals .The food service manager assures the following .Sanitary conditions are maintained in the storage, preparation and serving areas .All personnel follow proper cleaning and sanitizing instructions for all kitchen equipment. Cleaning schedules are posted and followed . Review of the facility policy titled, Employee Sanitary Practices, dated 2013, showed .All kitchen employees will practice standard sanitary procedures .All employees shall .Clean and sanitize equipment and work units after use . Review of the facility policy titled, General Sanitization of Kitchen, dated 2013 showed .The staff shall maintain the sanitization of the kitchen through compliance with a written,…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-05-04 · tag F0644 — isolated
    Coordinate 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 medical record review and interview the facility failed to refer 1 resident (#63), after the resident was identified with possible serious mental disorders, to the state-designated authority for a Level II Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) of 4 residents reviewed for PASARR. The findings include: Resident #63 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder and Generalized Anxiety. Continued review revealed the diagnoses of Paranoid Schizophrenia and Major Depressive Disorder were added on 3/18/2019. Review of a PASARR Level II Change in Status Request dated 4/28/2016, revealed Resident #63 had a diagnosis of Mental Illness of Psychotic/Delusional Disorder, Psychosis/Obsessive Compulsive Disorder, and Anxiety Disorder. Review of a quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE], revealed Resident #63 had diagnoses including Anxiety, Depression, and Schizophrenia. During an interview on 5/3/2022 at 12:40 PM, the Social Services Director…

    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 · D2019-06-05 · 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, medical record review, observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure practices to prevent the spread of infection were maintained for 1 resident (#302) of 1 resident reviewed with Clostridium Difficile Colitis (C. Difficile-bacteria that causes severe diarrhea and intestinal infection) of 19 residents sampled. The findings include: Review of the facility's policy Isolation-Categories of Transmission-Based Precautions revised 10/2018, revealed, .Transmission-Based Precautions are initiated when a resident develops signs and symptoms of a transmissible infection; arrives with symptoms of an infection .and is at risk of transmitting the infection to other residents .Contact Precautions may be implemented for residents known or suspected to be infected with microorganisms that can be transmitted by direct contact with the resident or indirect contact with environmental surfaces or resident-care items in the resident's environment . Review of the facility's policy Infection…

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to SIMCHA HYMAN & NAFTALI ZANZIPER — 79 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 3 of 52.6+0.4 vs chain
Health inspection 3 of 52.7+0.3 vs chain
Staffing 2 of 52.2-0.2 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 53.4+0.6 vs chain
The other 78 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.6★, per CMS)
1 of 5Beavercreek Health And RehabBeavercreek, OH 1 of 5Bradford Heights Nursing & RehabilitationHopkinsville, KY 1 of 5Centerville Health And RehabDayton, OH 1 of 5Clayton Rehabilitation and Healthcare CenterClayton, NC 1 of 5Dade City Health And Rehabilitation CenterDade City, FL 1 of 5Englewood Health And RehabEnglewood, OH 1 of 5Fulton Nursing and Rehabilitation, LLCFulton, KY 1 of 5Gainesville Health and RehabilitationGainesville, FL 1 of 5Garden View Health And Rehabilitation CenterVero Beach, FL 1 of 5Hertford Rehabilitation and Healthcare CenterHertford, NC 1 of 5Longwood Health And Rehabilitation CenterLongwood, FL 1 of 5Lotus Village Center for Nursing and RehabilitatioSparta, NC 1 of 5Magnolia Creek Nursing And RehabilitationCovington, TN 1 of 5Mills Nursing & RehabilitationMayfield, KY 1 of 5Mountain Ridge Health and RehabilitationMonticello, KY 1 of 5Naples Health And Rehabilitation CenterNaples, FL 1 of 5Southpoint Rehabilitation and Healthcare CenterDurham, NC 1 of 5Spring View Nursing & RehabilitationLeitchfield, KY 1 of 5Sunrise Point Health And Rehabilitation CenterRockledge, FL 1 of 5Windsor Rehabilitation and Healthcare CenterWindsor, NC 1 of 5Winter Park Care And RehabilitationWinter Park, FL 1 of 5Xenia Health And RehabXenia, OH 2 of 5Accordius Health at Rose Manor LLCDurham, NC 2 of 5Barren County Nursing and RehabilitationGlasgow, KY 2 of 5Bellbrook Health And RehabBellbrook, OH 2 of 5Cherokee Park RehabilitationLouisville, KY 2 of 5Clinton PlaceClinton, KY 2 of 5Collierville Nursing And Rehabilitation, LlcCollierville, TN 2 of 5Eden Rehabilitation and Healthcare CenterEden, NC 2 of 5Fairpark Health And RehabilitationMaryville, TN 2 of 5Glenview Health and RehabilitationGlasgow, KY 2 of 5Green Acres HealthcareMayfield, KY 2 of 5Jamestown Place Health And RehabJamestown, OH 2 of 5Lilac At Bayview, TheSaint Augustine, FL 2 of 5Madisonville Health and Rehabilitation, LLCMadisonville, KY 2 of 5Midtown Center For Health And RehabilitationMemphis, TN 2 of 5Pelican Health at CharlotteCharlotte, NC 2 of 5River Grove Health And RehabilitationLoudon, TN 2 of 5Stonecreek Health and RehabilitationPaducah, KY 2 of 5Sycamore Heights Health and RehabilitationLouisville, KY

Showing 40 of 78; lowest-rated first.

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
CLIFTON, WESLEYIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; ADP OF THE SNFsince 10/10/2024
VUJANOVIC, MICKIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 12/01/2020
CLEARVIEW HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT TN LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 12/02/2024

CMS files one row per role, so the 6 rows in the source record cover these 3 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

$10.9M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+1.7%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$3.2M
Related-party expense30% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 49%Medicare 9%Other / private 43%

This home reported $3.2M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 30% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

$304per resident / day
operating cost
$9,235per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$309per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in TN

Paying with Medicaid

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

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

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

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 445408. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-11-17, 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