Vmrc, Complete Living Care
1475 Virginia Avenue, Harrisonburg, VA 22802 · Non profit - Corporation · 120 certified beds · (540) 564-3500 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Nov 2018
- it did not file the payroll staffing data CMS requires — its 1 of 5 staffing rating is the rating CMS assigns for not reporting, not a measure of how many nurses are on the floor
- about 23% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
- its last standard health inspection was over 3 years ago — the star rating may not reflect current conditions
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 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 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 | 22.3% | 14.9% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 8.5% | 5.4% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.4% | 0.4% | 0.9% | typical for the state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 2.1% | 1.6% | 2.0% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.3% | 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 | 4.4% | 3.6% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 20.8% | 15.6% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 20.5% | 20.6% | 18.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 98.9% | 94.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 10.3% | 4.7% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 29.5% | 21.8% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 8.1% | 14.2% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.9% | 1.3% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 97.0% | 73.6% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 25.4% | 22.3% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 9.8% | 11.5% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 0.83 | 1.52 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.82 | 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.
66.9% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 469 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 60.9% 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 294 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.36 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 61% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 5% 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 | 66.9%CMS range 63.1–70.7 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.4%CMS range 7.0–11.2 | 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 | 60.9% | 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 | 55.8% | 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 | 46.3% | 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 | 95.6% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 98.1% | 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 | 99.1% | 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 | 0.6% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 3.2% | 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 | 5.5%CMS range 3.6–8.0 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.65 | 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
No payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours are on file for this home — and the record suggests that is because it did not report them. CMS rates its staffing 1 of 5, which is the rating CMS assigns when a home does not report. Every Medicare-certified nursing home is required to submit its actual payroll data quarterly, and that submission is what makes staffing numbers auditable rather than a claim. A home that does not file is not the same as a home with no data yet: ask this home directly what its nurse-to-resident ratios and weekend RN coverage are, why its payroll data is not filed, and weigh the independent health-inspection score heavily in the meantime.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 3 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
11 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Potential for harm · E2023-03-15 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — patternEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
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, resident interview, and facility document review, the facility staff failed to accommodate food preferences, food intolerance's and/or allergies for two of 21 residents in the survey sample, Resident #71 and Resident #72. Findings include: 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #71's food preferences were honored. Resident #71's diagnoses included, but were not limited to: diabetes mellitus, thrombocytopenia, chronic atrial fibrillation, gastric reflux and iron deficiency. The resident's most recent MDS (minimum data set) was a quarterly assessment dated [DATE]. The resident was assessed as a 14 cognitively, which indicated the resident was intact for daily decision making skills. The resident was also assessed as requiring supervision with at least one person assist for most ADL's (activities of daily living) and supervision with set up only for eating/meal consumption. On 03/13/23 at approximately 12:00 PM, Resident #71 was observed sitting at the dining room table.…
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 before2023-03-15 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview and facility document review the facility staff failed to ensure food temperatures were obtained prior to serving food and failed to maintain food temperature logs in 4 of six houses ([NAME], [NAME], [NAME], [NAME]). Findings include: 1. The facility staff failed to ensure food temperatures were obtained prior to serving food and failed to maintain food temperature logs for the [NAME] House. On 03/13/23 at 12:13 PM in the [NAME] House, CNA # 1 (certified nursing assistant) was observed plating and serving food to the residents. CNA #1 was asked if she had checked the food temperatures for the food being served. CNA #1 stated that they (staff) had not checked the temps for lunch, but stated, I can do it now. CNA #1 was made aware that the food temperatures should be obtained prior to serving the food. CNA #1 stated, We did temps for breakfast, but not for lunch. CNA #1 was asked for the food temperature logs. CNA #1 presented a book for the [NAME] House. The food temps 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 · D2023-03-15 · 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
Based on staff interview, facility document review, and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to follow professional standards of practice for one of thirteen residents in the survey sample. The Findings include: The facility nursing staff failed to enter a verbal physician's order into the electronic clinical record regarding Foley catheter placement for one of 21 residents, Resident #9. Diagnoses for Resident #9 included; Urine retention, inguinal hernia, depression, and congestive heart failure. The most current MDS (minimum data set) was an admission assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 2/3/23, Resident #9 was assessed with a cognitive score of 13 indicating cognitively intact. On 3/13/23 12:13 PM during an interview, Resident #9 was asked about his catheter. Resident #9 verbalized that he thought that the staff had placed the catheter because he was having trouble urinating and he possible had a urinary tract infection. Resident #9 went on to say the nurses are taking care of it and was not having any trouble with the catheter. On 3/13/23 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 before2023-03-15 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on a medication pass and pour observation, staff interview and facility document review, the facility staff failed to ensure infection control practices were followed for the administration of medications. Findings include: On 03/13/23 at approximately 3:58 PM, LPN (Licensed Practical Nurse) #1 prepared medications for Resident #43. LPN #1 donned (applied) gloves and prepared a glucometer to check the resident's blood glucose level. Once completed, LPN #1 discarded the glucometer strip, wiped off the glucometer, put it away and began to prepare medications for Resident #43. LPN #1 did not remove the gloves used to check the resident's blood glucose level after that task was completed. LPN #1 proceeded to dispense two Tylenol tablets into a plastic dispensing cup, then dispensed one Renvela, when attempting to dispense a second Renvela, the pill dropped to the floor. LPN #1 reached down with a gloved hand and picked the pill up and tossed it in the trash and resumed, by dispensing two more Renvela tablets…
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 before2021-07-21 · 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 staff interview and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to follow physician orders for 2 of 22 residents in the survey sample, Resident #37 and Resident #287. Fluid intake for Resident #37 and Resident #287 was not monitored and documented as ordered by the physician. The findings include: 1. Resident #37 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including lumbar fracture, altered mental status, right pubic fracture, hypo-osmolality, hyponatremia, hypertension, a-fib, congestive heart failure and colostomy. The admission Observation Assessment completed on 07/11/21 assessed Resident #37 as alert, and attentive. Oriented to person, place and time. Having an intact memory (past and present), with clear and organized thinking . On 07/21/21 Resident #37's clinical record was reviewed. Observed on the physician's order report was the following: .Order Type: POC (plan of care) -Task. Start Date: 07/11/2021. End Date: Open Ended. 1200ml…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2018-11-29 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interview and facility document review, the facility staff failed to implement a program for prevention of Legionella and other waterborne pathogens and failed to ensure infection control policies were reviewed annually. The facility failed to perform a risk assessment to identify where Legionella and other waterborne pathogens could grow and/or spread; failed to implement a water management program based upon industry standards and/or the CDC (centers for disease control) toolkit and; failed to perform and document specified testing for prevention of Legionella. In addition, the facility had performed no annual review of infection control policies. The findings include: 1. On 11/28/18 at 1:15 p.m., the maintenance director was interviewed about evidence of a water management program to prevent the growth and spread of Legionella and other waterborne pathogens. The maintenance director stated the facility had not set up a program yet to check for Legionella. The maintenance director stated they performed standard testing and maintenance on the boilers and water towers…
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 before2018-11-29 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview and facility document review, the facility staff failed to store, prepare and serve food in a sanitary manner in the main kitchen. [NAME] slaw, which temped at 53 degrees and was made with mayonnaise was served for the lunchtime meal in one of eight houses on the facility campus. Findings were: Initial tour of the facility was conducted on 11/27/2018 beginning at approximately 11:45 a.m. Upon arrival in one of the individual houses on campus, OS (other staff) #5 was observed in the kitchen, preparing to serve lunch. The menu for the day was stuffed pepper casserole, cole slaw and dessert. Lunchtime temperatures were obtained by OS #5. The temperature of the cole slaw was 53 degrees. OS #5 was observed plating the cole slaw and serving it to the the residents residing in the home. OS #5 was questioned about the cole slaw. She was asked if the cole slaw dressing was mayonnaise based. She stated Yes, I fixed it last evening (Monday 11/26/2018) and it has been in the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2018-11-29 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
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 honor the right to refuse medications for one of 25 residents in the survey sample. A nurse forced Resident #56 to take medications against her wishes by holding down her arms, pinching her nose closed until her mouth opened and pushing her lips against her teeth. The findings include: Resident #56 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Alzheimer's dementia, seizure disorder, anxiety, depression and high blood pressure. The minimum data set (MDS) dated [DATE] assessed Resident #56 with short and long-term memory problems and severely impaired cognitive skills. A facility reported incident form dated 7/12/18 documented certified nurses' aides (CNAs) reported they observed registered nurse (RN) #1 being rough and forceful with Resident #56 when giving oral medications on 7/12/18. This report documented, . [CNA #3] reported to [administrator] on July 12, 2018, that she witnessed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2018-11-29 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to ensure one of 25 residents was free from physical abuse that included restraint. A nurse forced Resident #56 to take medications by holding down her arms, pinching her nose closed until her mouth opened and pushing her lips against her teeth in an attempt to get her to swallow and/or take medications. The findings include: Resident #56 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Alzheimer's dementia, seizure disorder, anxiety, depression and high blood pressure. The minimum data set (MDS) dated [DATE] assessed Resident #56 with short and long-term memory problems and severely impaired cognitive skills. A facility reported incident form dated 7/12/18 documented certified nurses' aides (CNAs) reported they observed registered nurse (RN) #1 being rough and forceful with Resident #56 when giving oral medications on 7/12/18. This report documented, . [CNA #3] reported to [administrator]…
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 before2018-11-29 · 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 clinical record review, facility staff failed to administer a medication per manufacturer guidelines for one of 25 residents in the survey sample, Resident #52. Facility staff failed to administer Levothyroxine per manufacturer guidelines, (on an empty stomach) for Resident #52. Findings included: Resident #52 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including, but not limited to: Anal Cancer, Macular Degeneration, Depression, Parkinson's Disease, and Hypothyroidism. The most recent MDS (minimum data set) was a significant change assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 10/12/2018. Resident #52 was assessed as impaired in her short and long term memory and moderately impaired in her daily decision making skills. Resident #52 was observed eating breakfast with fellow residents on 11/28/18 at approximately 8:15 a.m. During the medication pass and pour observation conducted 11/28/2018 at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · C2023-03-15 · tag F0732 — widespreadPost nurse staffing information every day.
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 and staff interview, the facility failed to post nurse staffing information for all nursing areas. There was no nurse staffing posted for the six residential houses on the facility campus. The findings were During a meeting at 4:30 p.m. on 3/14/2023, that included the Administrator, Director of Nursing, and the survey team, the Administrator was asked where nurse staffing was posted. The Administrator said the staffing was posted in the lobby of the Oak Lea building. The Oak Lea building houses the administrative offices as well as the Transitional Care Unit. At approximately 10:00 a.m. on 3/15/2023, the nurse staffing was observed posted in the Oak Lea lobby. The posting included staffing for the Oak Lea Transitional Care Unit as well as six residential houses; the [NAME], [NAME], [NAME], [NAME], Warsack, and [NAME]. At approximately 10:15 a.m. on 3/15/2023, a tour of the six residential houses was conducted. At each house, the staff was asked if nurse staffing was posted for 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.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| BERT, DARYL | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 04/01/2020 |
| BLOSSER, KELLY | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 04/01/2021 |
| BLOSSER, MYRON | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 04/01/2022 |
| BOSHART-YODER, TERESA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 04/01/2018 |
| HARTMAN, JACQUELINE | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 04/01/2014 |
| HOLLAR, HUNTER | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 04/01/2018 |
| KING, DEBRA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 04/01/2021 |
| SEITZ, RANDY | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 04/01/2020 |
| SMUCKER, DAVID | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 04/01/2020 |
| YODER, LAURA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 04/01/2024 |
| BELL, DONALD | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 04/01/2024 |
| PIPER, MICHAEL | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 11/08/2002 |
| THORPE, REBECCA | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/12/2018 |
| VIRGINIA MENNONITE RETIREMENT COMMUNITY INC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 10/01/1988 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 39 rows in the source record cover these 14 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.
This home reported $3.8M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 23% 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. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2024). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in 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 495385. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2023-03-15, 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.