Monroe Health & Rehab Center
1150 Northwest Drive, Charlottesville, VA 22901 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 180 certified beds · (434) 973-7933 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- a high number of inspection citations overall (32) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $10,539 in federal fines (most recent 2025-08-21)
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
- about 21% 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.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 3 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
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 | 5 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 improved from 3 to 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
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 | 19.2% | 14.9% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 5.0% | 5.4% | 5.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.4% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 2.2% | 1.6% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 9.3% | 18.7% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 1.6% | 3.6% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 14.1% | 15.6% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 6.3% | 20.6% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 94.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 2.0% | 4.7% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 11.7% | 21.8% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 5.6% | 14.2% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.3% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 94.5% | 73.6% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 26.1% | 22.3% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 12.6% | 11.5% | 12.0% | typical |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.33 | 1.52 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.54 | 1.48 | 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.
55.3% 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 126 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 60.5% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 124 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 0.22 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 26% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 10% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 55.3%CMS range 44.9–63.7 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.8%CMS range 7.0–13.5 | 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 | 60.5% | 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 | 62.9% | 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 | 55.6% | 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 | 98.8% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 99.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 1.2% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.1%CMS range 4.2–10.5 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.07 | 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 180 beds and averages 131.9 residents a day — about 73% occupied, or roughly 48 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.28 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.47 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.89 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.77 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.48 on weekdays — 21% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.55 to 0.26 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 45% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
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.
32 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 21 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · G2025-08-21 · 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 resident interview, staff interview, clinical record review, and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to provide care in a manner to minimize/prevent accidents/injury for one resident (Resident #17-R17) in a survey sample of eighteen residents, which resulted in harm for R17. The findings included:1. For R17, the facility staff failed to transfer the resident with a mechanical lift in a manner to prevent accidents and injury, which resulted in a significant injury, which was harm. The facility self-identified the deficient practice and achieved past non-compliance on 10/9/24. On 8/19/25-8/20/25, attempts were made to visit with and interview R17 but were not successful since R17 was out of the facility due to a medical procedure. On the evening of 8/20/25, a clinical record review was conducted of R17's chart. According to a progress note dated 10/7/24, the entry read, The CNA [certified nursing assistant] reported to this nurse that the resident was bleeding from his R. [right] leg.…
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 · F2026-04-23 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interviews, and facility document review, the facility staff failed to properly store, prepare and distribute food in the facility kitchen in a manner that would prevent foodborne illnesses.The findings included:The facility staff failed to maintain one of two kitchen freezers in proper working order, freezer #2 contained multiple food items that were not fully frozen. The facility staff had stacked wet pans nesting them while wet and a large scoop was stored inside an uncovered container of powdered thickener. There was a white cloth lying on the floor of the refrigerator and a roll of buffet ham was stored above produce, creating a risk of cross-contamination. On 04/21/2026 at 5:55 a.m., during the initial kitchen tour, the survey team observed a clear plastic container of powdered thickener without a lid, with a scoop inside. Dietary Aide #1 removed the scoop. The survey team observed numerous silver pans stacked on a metal rack with visible water droplets present on several pans. When asked about the stacking of wet pans Dietary Aide #1 stated that…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-23 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure 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 staff interview and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to accurately complete an admission minimum data set (MDS) assessment for 1 of 28 residents, Resident #84.The findings included:The facility staff failed to accurately code section A1550 (conditions related to intellectual and/or developmental disabilities [ID/DD]) on the admission MDS assessment.Resident #84 has a documented diagnosis of Coffins-Siris Syndrome, a genetic disorder characterized by developmental delays and intellectual disability. Section C (cognitive patterns) of Resident #84's admission MDS assessment with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 02/26/2026 included a brief interview for mental status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating Resident #84 was cognitively intact. Section A1550 was coded to indicate the resident had no conditions related to ID/DD.A review of Resident #84's clinical record revealed a Level I Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASSR), dated 02/20/2026, which referred the individual for 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-23 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, clinical record review, and facility document review, the facility staff failed to develop a comprehensive care plan (CCP) for 2 of 28 residents, Resident #11 and Resident #105. The findings included:1. For Resident #11, the facility staff failed to develop a CCP for enhanced barrier precautions. Resident #11 had a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube in place for nutritional support. Resident #11's diagnoses included malignant neoplasm of tonsils and Parkinsons disease. Section C (cognitive patterns) of Resident #11's admission minimum data set (MDS) assessment with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 04/05/2026 included a brief interview for mental status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating Resident #11 was cognitively intact. Section K (swallowing/nutritional status) was coded to indicate this resident had a PEG tube in place. During initial tour the surveyor observed an enhanced barrier precautions sign and personal protective equipment (PPE) outside of Resident #11's room. Staff were observed in this room with PPE in place. Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-23 · 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
Based on staff interview, clinical record review, and facility document review, the facility staff failed to revise the comprehensive care plan for 2 of 28 residents, Resident #58 and Resident #138. The findings included:1.For Resident #58, the facility staff failed to revise the comprehensive person-centered care plan to reflect a medical provider order for comfort care measures on 2/21/26. Resident #58's diagnosis list indicated diagnoses that included, but were not limited to, atherosclerotic heart disease of native coronary artery s/p (status-post) CABG (coronary artery bypass grafting), sequelae of cerebral infarction, vascular dementia, depression, weakness, and cognitive communication deficit. The most recent admission minimum data set (MDS) with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 1/26/26, assigned the resident a brief interview for mental status (BIMS) summary score of 4 out of 15 for cognitive abilities, indicating the resident was severely impaired in cognition. A review of a medical provider order with a start date of 2/21/26 read in part, .Comfort care.no labs, no…
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 · D2026-04-23 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, resident interview, staff interview, and clinical record review the facility staff failed to provide activities of daily living care for 1 of 28 residents, Resident #7. The findings included:Resident #7 was observed to have long, jagged fingernails. Resident #7's diagnoses included vascular dementia and major depressive disorder. Section C (cognitive patterns) of Resident #7's admission minimum data set (MDS) assessment with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 03/19/2026 included a brief interview for mental status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating Resident #7 was cognitively intact. Section GG (functional abilities) was coded to indicate Resident #7 required partial/moderate assistance with personal hygiene. Resident #7's comprehensive care plan identified a need for assistance with activities of daily living, dressing, grooming, toileting, feeding, and oral care. Approaches included check nail length and trim and clean as needed, per protocols (start date: 03/23/2026). On 04/21/2026 at 12:55 p.m., during an interview with Resident #7, their fingernails were…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-23 · 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
Based on observation, staff interview, clinical record review and facility document review the facility staff failed to follow physician's orders for 3 of 28 residents, Resident #15, Resident #120 and Resident #58. The findings included:1. For Resident #15 the facility staff failed to administer GenTeal eye drops (used to treat dry eyes) and Voltaren gel (used to treat pain) per the physician's orders. Resident #15's face sheet listed diagnoses which included but not limited to other corneal scars and opacities and primary osteoarthritis, unspecified site. Resident #15's most recent quarterly minimum data set with an assessment reference date of 03/31/26 assigned the resident a brief interview for mental status score of 3 out of 15 in section C, cognitive patterns. This indicates that the resident is severely cognitively impaired. Resident #15's comprehensive care plan was reviewed and contained plans for Pain. Resident is at risk for pain secondary to Osteoarthritis and Visual Function. Resident has visual impairment r/t (related to) DX (diagnosis) of corneal scars and opacities.…
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 · D2026-04-23 · tag F0711 — isolatedEnsure the resident's doctor reviews the resident's care, writes, signs and dates progress notes and orders, at each required visit.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, and clinical record review, the facility physician failed to review the total program of care including medications at each visit for 1 of 28 residents in the sample, Resident #87 (R87).The findings include: On 4/21/2026 at 7:40 AM, R87 was observed asleep in bed. A container of Beet Root Heart Gummies (a nutritional supplement) and Sea Veg (a nutritional supplement) were observed on the bedside table.During an interview with R87 that took place on 4/21/2026 at 11:08 AM, a container of Beet Root Heart Gummies and a container of Sea Veg were again observed on the bedside table. When asked about these supplements, R87 stated that he had ordered these items online and that he was taking these supplements to improve his health. An interview was conducted with Medical Director on 4/22/26 at 1:56 PM. The Medical Director stated that he became aware that R87 was taking Beet Root Heart Gummies a couple of weeks ago. The Medical Director stated that he did not check R87's MAR (Medication Administration Record) to see if the Beet Root Heart Gummies or…
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 · D2026-04-23 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, resident and staff interview, clinical record review, and facility document review the facility failed to ensure the safe storage of biologicals for 1 of 28 residents in the sample, Resident #87 (R87).The findings include:A Resident Face Sheet indicated that R87 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a medical history that included hypertension (high blood pressure), heart failure, and hypothyroidism.On the most recent MDS (Minimum Data Set), a quarterly assessment with an ARD (Assessment Reference Date) of 4/15/26, R87 scored a 14 out of 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status indicating that R87 was cognitively intact. A comprehensive review of R87's clinical record revealed that on 1/15/25 the facility documented an assessment to determine R87s ability to self administer medications. This assessment revealed that R87 did not wish to self administer medications therefore R87 was not screened for the ability to self administer medications.R87's current medical provider orders 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 · D2026-04-23 · tag F0810 — isolatedProvide special eating equipment and utensils for residents who need them and appropriate assistance.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, family interview, staff interview, clinical record review, and facility document review, the facility staff failed to utilize appropriate adaptive devices for meals for (1) one of (28) twenty-eight current sampled residents, Resident #58. The findings included:For Resident #58, the facility staff failed to utilize a plate guard and a two-handled cup with lid for the resident's meal on 4/21/26 as ordered by a medical provider. Resident #58's diagnosis list indicated diagnoses that included, but were not limited to, sequelae of cerebral infarction, vascular dementia, depression, weakness, and cognitive communication deficit. The most recent admission minimum data set (MDS) with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 1/26/26, assigned the resident a brief interview for mental status (BIMS) summary score of 4 out of 15 for cognitive abilities, indicating the resident was severely impaired in cognition. On 4/21/26 at 11:44 AM, Resident #58's Family Member #1 (FM#1) was interviewed via phone conversation and stated the resident has a plate guard to assist with eating…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-23 · 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
Based on observation, staff interview, clinical record review, and facility document review the facility staff failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, comfortable environment for 2 of 28 residents, Resident #72 Resident #115. The findings included: 1. For resident #72 the facility staff failed to ensure transmission-based precautions were followed for a resident with active influenza. The policy entitled, Transmission Based Precautions and Isolation Policy with an effective date of 05/19/2025 was reviewed. The document read in part, 2. Droplet Precautions- intended to prevent transmission of pathogens spread through close respiratory or mucous membrane contact with respiratory secretions. A. A single patient room is preferred but not required. Assess the various risks associated with other resident placement options. Maintain a spatial separation of greater than 3-6 feet (when space allows) and draw the curtain between resident beds. B. A mask is worn for close contact with infectious resident. C. Gloves, gown are worn…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 21 citations
- Potential for harm · F2025-08-21 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — widespreadMake sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, resident and staff interviews, clinical record review, and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to maintain an effective pest control program on three of three resident units and in the main kitchen and common areas of the facility. The findings included:On 8/19/25 at 1:55 p.m., a review of resident council minutes revealed that on 7/7/25, the resident council reported that Residents are seeing gnats and roaches. Both residents listed on the grievance lived on the 200 South unit. During the resident council meeting held Dec. 18, 2024, it noted . The group all mentioned an increase in cockroach sightings. In the September 2024 meeting it noted, . Resident [name redacted] stated he spotted a cockroach in his room by his bed recently. During the August 2024 resident council meeting, notes included, . Cockroaches have recently been spotted in [three resident's names redacted] and in the phone booth. Group stated that all has already been reported. On March 20, 2024, during…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-08-21 · tag F0554 — isolatedAllow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, resident interview, staff interview, clinical record review, and facility documentation review the facility staff failed to assess a resident's ability to safely self-administer medications for one resident, Resident #9 (R9) out of a survey sample of 18 residents. The findings included:Facility staff allowed R9 to keep medication at the bedside for self-administration without completing a self-administration assessment.On 8/19/25 at 11:10 a.m., an observation was conducted of medications at R9's bedside. At that time, an inhaler, CBD pain ointment, menthol pain ointment, and vitamin D3 were observed in a basket.On 8/19/25 at 11:15 a.m., an interview was conducted with R9 regarding the medications observed. R9 stated that she keeps the pain ointments in her room because she was undergoing chemotherapy and uses them for pain relief. R9 then said, I take my inhaler twice a day and the nurse brings it in here in the morning and leaves it with me to take it in the morning and at bedtime.On 8/19/25 at 11:40 a.m., an interview was conducted with a licensed practical…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-08-21 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interviews and clinical record review the facility failed to ensure reasonable care for the protection of personal property for one of eighteen residents, Resident #3 (R3). R3 did not have a personal property invoice completed upon admission to help track valuables. The Findings Include:Diagnoses for R3 included contusion of left lower leg, status post left knee surgery, obesity, depression, kidney disease, and deep vein thrombosis. The most current MDS (minimum data set) was a discharge assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 08/1/2024. R3 was assessed with a cognitive score of 15 indicating cognitively intact.R3 was reviewed due to a report of possible missing medication (Ozempic brought from home to the facility) and two gift cards.Review of R3's clinical record did not evidence an inventory form had been filled out upon admission or at any time during R3's stay at the facility.On 8/19/25 at 2:30 p.m. license practical nurse (LPN #7) was interviewed regarding documentation of resident's inventory list. LPN #7 explained when a resident is admitted an…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-21 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure 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 staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to follow professional standards of care regarding assessment documentation for two of eighteen residents in the survey sample (Residents #3 and #17).The findings include:1. For Resident #3, nursing staff failed to document a descriptive assessment and immediate care interventions implemented for a skin tear. Resident #3 (R3) was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included iron deficiency anemia, human immunodeficiency virus, gout, obesity, depression, hypertension, chronic kidney disease, anxiety, cryptococcosis, and deep vein thrombosis. The minimum data set (MDS) dated [DATE] assessed R3 as cognitively intact. R3's clinical record documented a Focused Head to Toe Observation form dated 6/28/24. This observation form documented, res [resident] unbuckled seatbelt in transportation van and fell onto floor recving [receiving] skin tear. This form documented an assessment of the resident that included…
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 before2025-08-21 · 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 observations, resident interview, staff interview, clinical record review, and facility documentation review the facility staff failed to follow physician orders for two residents, Resident #10 (R10) and Resident #16 (R16) out of a survey sample of 18 residents.The findings included:Staff failed to transcribe physician orders for compression bandages, ace wraps, and discontinuation of furosemide 20 mg daily for R10.On 8/19/25 at 11:10 a.m., during an observation of R10's room, her spouse expressed concerns that lower extremity treatments were not being done. The spouse stated the last treatment occurred on the Wednesday before R10's admission on [DATE].On 8/20/25 at 9:50 a.m., an interview was conducted with the unit manager on unit one, licensed practical nurse, LPN#2 (LPN2). LPN2 stated that the resident R10 was admitted around 5 p.m. on 8/8/25, and that she had orders for, Pro-fore that was never carried over. It was missed on admission. The resident wanted to use the Pro-fore wraps for her edema,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-08-21 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, resident interview, staff interview, clinical record review, and facility documentation review the facility staff failed to administer oxygen per physician's orders, and to date and label oxygen tubing and humidifier bottle for one resident, Resident #10 (R10) out of a survey sample of 18 residents.The findings included:R10 was not being administered her ordered oxygen, and the oxygen tubing and humidifier bottle were not labeled with a date of placement.On 8/19/25 at 11:10 a.m., an observation of R10 revealed that oxygen was not being administered as ordered. The oxygen concentrator was observed in the resident's room with the humidifier bottle sitting on the floor. There was no oxygen tubing connected to the concentrator. During the observation, R10's spouse was present in the room, stated that the resident had not had the oxygen on since the previous day when it was removed and the oxygen tubing was taken out of the room. A subsequent observation of R10 on 8/19/25 at 2:45 p.m., again revealed that oxygen was not being administered per the physician's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-21 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard 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 resident interview, staff interviews, and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to maintian a complete and accurate clinical record for one resident (Resident #17- R17) in a survey sample of eighteen residents. The findings included:For R17, who was hospitalized following an incident of rolling out of bed and sustained a hematoma, the facility staff failed to have the hospital report/records available in R17's clinical record. On the evening of 8/20/25, a clinical record review was conducted of R17's chart. According to R17's progress notes dated 7/29/25, which read, Resident rolled off of bed onto floor during ADL care. Observed skin tear to right flank area. Left thigh/knee area with edema. Resident denies pain r/t [related to] fall. Resident states that he did not hit head. MD/RP [medical doctor/responsible party] aware. On 8/21/25 at 8:10 a.m., an interview was conducted with R17. R17 explained the incident on 7/29/25 and reported, I have to use the bed pan and the aide was trying 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 · Dcited before2024-07-30 · 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
Based on staff interview, and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to complete an assessment after a fall for one of 3 residents. Resident #1 (R1) did not have documented assessment after a fall. The findings included: Diagnoses for R1 included Dementia, manic depression, and fractures secondary to falls. The most current MDS (minimum data set) was a quarterly assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 6/3/24. R1 was assessed with a cognitive score of 00 indicating severely cognitively impaired. R1's clinical record was reviewed regarding a falls leading to R1 being sent to the hospital and diagnosed with two rib fractures and lacerated spleen on 12/9/23. Progress notes dated 12/9/23 documented a fall had occurred at 4:16 AM while R1 was in the hallway taking off clothing. A full assessment was completed and did not show any abnormalities or injuries. R1 was assisted back to bed. Another progress note dated 12/9/23 at 12:15 PM indicated R1 had become confused, lethargic, restless, with an unsteady gait, and was hypotensive. R1 was transferred to the hospital…
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 before2024-07-30 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard 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
Based on staff interview, and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to maintain an accurate clinical record for one resident (Resident #1, R1) in a survey sample of 3 residents. The findings included: The facility staff failed to maintain accurate documentation with regards to falls. Diagnoses for R1 included Dementia, manic depression, and fractures secondary to falls. The most current MDS (minimum data set) was a quarterly assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 6/3/24. R1 was assessed with a cognitive score of 00 indicating severely cognitively impaired. R1's clinical record was reviewed regarding a falls leading to R1 being sent to the hospital and diagnosed with two rib fractures and lacerated spleen on 12/9/23. Progress notes dated 12/9/23 documented a fall had occurred at 4:16 AM while R1 was in the hallway taking off clothing. A full assessment was completed and did not show any abnormalities or injuries. R1 was assisted back to bed. Another progress note dated 12/9/23 at 12:15 PM indicated R1 had become confused, lethargic, restless, with an…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2022-07-21 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — patternProvide 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 a medication pass and pour observation, clinical record review, staff interview, facility document review, and during the course of a complaint investigation the facility staff failed to follow physician's order for two of 27 resident's in the survey sample (Resident #26 and Resident #95) and failed to obtain transportation to appointments for two of 27 residents (Resident #11 and #39) and failed to accurately assess skin impairments for one of 27 residents (Resident #24). 1. The facility staff failed to follow physician's orders during a medication pass and pour observation for Resident #26. 2. The facility staff failed to follow physician's orders for the administration of a chemotherapy medication for Resident #95. 3. The facility staff failed to ensure transportation for outside rehabilitation appointments for Resident #11. 4. The facility staff failed to ensure transportation to an endocrinologist appointment for #39. 5. Resident #24 had conflicting and inaccurate assessments of skin tears.…
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 · D2022-07-21 · tag F0559 — isolatedHonor the resident's right to share a room with spouse or roommate of choice and receive written notice before a change is made.
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 staff interview, facility policy review and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to provide advance notice of a room/roommate change for one of twenty-seven residents in the survey sample. Resident #75 was moved to a new room with a new roommate without prior notification to the resident's representative. The findings include: Resident #75 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included Alzheimer's dementia, insomnia, hypertension, history of COVID-19, major depressive disorder, COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease), cerebral infarction, hemiplegia, aphasia and dysphagia. The minimum data set (MDS) dated [DATE] assessed Resident #75 with severely impaired cognitive skills. Resident #75's clinical record documented the resident was moved to a new room with a roommate on 7/5/22. A nursing note dated 7/5/22 at 6:38 p.m. documented, Residents family present to see the resident .daughter came back to the nurses station asking why her mother was moved to another room, this nurse…
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 before2022-07-21 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on resident interview, staff interview and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to develop a CCP (comprehensive care plan) for one of 25 residents in the survey sample. Resident #10 did not have a care plan for smoking. Findings include: Diagnoses for Resident #10 included: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cirrhosis of the liver, obesity, and chronic pain. The most current MDS (minimum data set) was a significant change assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 4/19/22. Resident #10's cognitive score was a 13 indicating cognitively intact. On 7/19/22 at 11:44 AM during an interview with Resident #10, Resident #10 verbalized that he smokes but the the staff would not let him smoke. When asked why, Resident #10 verbalized he was unsure, stating I don't know. On 7/19/22 Resident #10's smoking assessment dated [DATE] was reviewed and documented: Resident chooses to smoke, proceed with assessment. The assessment also documented Resident #10 needed supervision while smoking based…
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 before2022-07-21 · 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 observation, staff interview and record review, the facility staff failed to review and revise a comprehensive care plan (CCP) for 1 of 27 in the survey sample. Resident #70's CCP was not reviewed and revised to reflect a wander guard device, which was discontinued. The findings included: Resident #70 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included hyperlipidemia, cerebral infarction, major depressive disorder, hypertension, Alzheimer's Disease, Dementia with behavioral disturbances, and repeated falls. The minimum data set (MDS) dated [DATE] was a quarterly, and assessed Resident #70 as moderately impaired for daily decision making with a score of 8 out of 15. The MDS assessed Resident $70 as having fluctuating periods of inattention, disorganized thinking and wandering for 1-3 days. Under Section P - Restraints, the MDS assessed Resident #70 has having a wander guard for elopement risk. Resident #70 was interviewed on 07/19/2022 at 2:30 p.m. while in laying in bed. Resident #70 was asked…
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 before2022-07-21 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure 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 clinical record review, staff interview and facility document review, the facility staff failed to meet professional standards of practice for one of 27 residents in the survey sample, (Resident #95); the facility staff documented Resident #95 received chemotherapy medication when the medication was not available for administration. Findings include: Diagnoses for Resident #95 included, but were not limited to: high blood pressure, DM (diabetes mellitus), hemiplegia, major depressive disorder, history of pulmonary embolism, and rectal cancer. Resident #95's most recent MDS (minimum data set) was an admission assessment dated [DATE]. This MDS assessed the resident with a cognitive score of 13, indicating the resident was intact for daily decision making skills. On 07/20/22 Resident #95's clinical records were reviewed. The resident had a current physician's order for the chemotherapy medication, Capecitabine Tablet 500 MG (milligrams) Give 2 tablet by mouth two times a day every Mon, Tue, Wed, Thu, Fri…
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 · D2022-07-21 · tag F0685 — isolatedAssist a resident in gaining access to vision and hearing services.
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 complaint investigation, clinical record review, resident interview, and staff interview, the facility failed for one of 27 residents in the survey sample, Resident # 27, to ensure transportation for vision related medical appointments was provided. Resident # 27 missed three appointments for vision care between 5/5/2022 and 7/15/2022 due to transportation issues. The findings were: Resident # 27 in the survey was admitted with diagnoses that included acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, hypertension, gastroesophageal reflux disease, neurogenic bladder, diabetes mellitus, hyperlipidemia, thyroid disorder, cerebral palsy, paraplegia, morbid obesity, history of COVID-19, chronic renal insufficiency, chronic pain, sleep apnea, and generalized muscle weakness. According to an Annual Minimum Data Set with an Assessment Reference Date of 5/4/2022, the resident was assessed under Section C (Cognitive Patterns) as being cognitively intact, with a Summary Score of 15 out of 15. Under Section B (Hearing,…
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 before2022-07-21 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard 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 staff interview, clinical record review, facility document review, and in the course of a complaint investigation, the facility staff failed to ensure a complete and accurate clinical record for one of 27 residents. Resident #121's ADL (activities of daily living) forms included documentation that care was provided while she was in the hospital. Findings were: Resident #121 was admitted to the facility with the following diagnoses including but not limited to: AFTT (adult failure to thrive) schizophrenia, autoimmune hepatitis, gastrointestinal hemorrhage, history of mental and behavior problems, coronary artery disease, and transient cerebral ischemic attacks. A quarterly MDS (minimum data set) with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 11/16/2021 (MDS most recent to the time frame of the complaint) assessed Resident #121 as moderately impaired with a cognitive summary score of 12. A significant change MDS with an ARD of 01/18/2022 (Post hospitalization 01/11/2022-01/13/2022) assessed her as cognitively…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2020-03-12 · tag F0641 — patternEnsure 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 clinical record review and staff interview, the facility staff failed to accurately complete MDS (minimum data set) assessments for two of 32 residents, Resident # 35 and Resident #97. Resident #35 was not assessed as edentulous on her annual MDS and Resident #97 was not assessed as having a lap buddy since it's implementation on 09/20/2018. Findings were: 1. Resident #35 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included but were not limited to: cognitive impairment, dysphagia, Type 2 diabetes mellitus, and hypertension. The most recent MDS was a quarterly assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 12/24/2019. She was assessed as moderately impaired in her cognitive status with a summary score of 09. During interviews Resident #35 was observed to be without any teeth (edentulous). Review of the clinical record contained information that Resident #35 had her remaining teeth pulled in November of 2018. Her annual MDS with an ARD of 04/26/2019 did not provide assessment information…
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 before2020-03-12 · 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 resident interview, staff interview and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to review and revise a comprehensive care plan (CCP) for one of 32 in the survey sample. Resident #121's CCP was not revised for impaired mobility and transfer assistance. Resident #121 was originally admitted on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included hemiplegia and hemiparesis following a cerebral infarction (stroke) affecting the left side, bilateral osteoarthritis of the knee, chronic kidney disease - stage 2, congestive heart failure, bipolar disorder, and muscle weakness. The most recent minimum data set (MDS) dated [DATE] which was a significant change, assessed Resident #121 as cognitively intact for daily decision making with a score of 14 out of 15. Under Section G - Functional Status, the MDS assessed the resident as extensive assistance, requiring one person physical assistance for bed mobility, dressing and eating; total dependent, requiring two person physical assistance 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2020-03-12 · 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 medication pass and pour observation, staff interview, and facility document review, the facility staff failed to administer medications per manufacturer's recommendations during medication administration on the third floor. LPN (licensed practical nurse) #1 crushed an extended release tablet of Isosorbide (a heart medication) prior to administration. The facility also failed to obtain weekly weights on 1 of 32 residents, Resident #41. Findings were: 1. A medication pass and pour observation was conducted on 03/11/2020 at approximately 8:20 a.m. on the third floor of the facility. LPN #1 was observed preparing medications for administration to Resident #51. After placing all the medications in a pill cup, he stated, She takes hers crushed in applesauce. He proceeded to place the pills in a plastic bag and crushed them, then mixed them with applesauce. He took them to Resident #51's room and administered them. After administration of the medications, LPN #1 was asked to look at the medication card 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.
- Potential for harm · D2020-03-12 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide 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 observation, staff interview, and clinical record review, the facility failed to provide care and services to promote healing and prevent infection of a pressure ulcer for one of 32 Residents. Resident #128's pressure ulcer was left uncovered. The Findings Include: Resident #128 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a current readmission on [DATE]. Diagnoses for Resident #128 included: Sepsis, Urinary tract infection, and stage 3 pressure ulcer to left buttock. The most current MDS (minimum data set) was a significant change assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 2/21/20. Resident #128 was assessed with a score of 13 indicating cognitively intact. On 03/11/20 at 11:00 AM, license practical nurse (LPN #4) was observed performing a dressing change to Resident #128's left buttock pressure ulcer. LPN #4 was assisted in turning Resident #128. Upon exposing Resident #128's buttock, it was observed that Resident #128 did not have a dressing intact. Resident #128 was laying on a protective…
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 before2020-03-12 · 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
Based on medication pass and pour observation, staff interview, and facility document review, LPN (licensed practical nurse) #1 failed to follow infection control practices during the administration of medications on the third floor. LPN #1 was observed preparing and administering medications to two residents. He did not wash his hands with soap and water or use hand sanitizer during the observation. Findings were: A medication pass and pour observation was conducted on 03/11/2020 beginning at approximately 8:20 a.m. on the third floor of the facility. LPN #1 was observed preparing medications for administration to Resident #29 and Resident #51. LPN #1 did not wash his hands or use hand sanitizer before beginning the medication preparation for Resident #29. He entered Resident #29's room, gave the medications, and returned to the cart. He then began preparing medications for Resident #51. He did not wash his hands or use hand sanitizer between giving medications to Resident #51 and preparing medications for Resident #29. He entered Resident #29's room and administered her…
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
$10,539 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $10,539 — penalty dated 2025-08-21
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to SABER HEALTHCARE GROUP — 126 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 3 of 5 | 2.9 | +0.1 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 2.6 | -0.6 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 2.2 | -0.2 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.0 | +1.0 vs chain |
The other 125 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.9★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 125; 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 / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| WWBV HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 09/30/2019 |
| MONROE REAL ESTATE GROUP, LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST | — | since 02/26/2021 |
| VOLPE, BENJAMIN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 03/01/2019 |
| WEISBERG, WILLIAM | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/22/2026 |
| NICOLUZAKIS, GREGORY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 03/01/2019 |
| SABER GOVERNANCE LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 09/01/2019 |
| ADKINS, KENNETH | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 05/30/2023 |
| MORRISS, MARK | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/07/2020 |
| CIBC BANK USA | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/26/2021 |
| CITRIN COOPERMAN ADVISORS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/01/2018 |
| SHG MANAGEMENT LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/01/2019 |
| THE HUNTINGTON NATIONAL BANK | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/28/2019 |
| WALKER & ASSOCIATES PC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/01/2018 |
| EVANS, JONATHAN | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/01/2018 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 18 rows in the source record cover these 14 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
8 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $2.8M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 21% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in VA
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 Virginia 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 495326. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-23, 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.