Grayson Health and Rehabilitation
400 South Independence Avenue, Independence, VA 24348 · For profit - Corporation · 120 certified beds · (276) 773-0303 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- a high number of inspection citations overall (31) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
- its last standard health inspection was over 2 years ago — the star rating may not reflect current conditions
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 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 | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 5 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 4 to 5 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 | 11.4% | 14.9% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 6.9% | 5.4% | 5.4% | worse |
| 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 | 1.0% | 1.6% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 5.1% | 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 | 3.1% | 3.6% | 3.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 12.2% | 15.6% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 46.2% | 20.6% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 95.4% | 94.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 6.1% | 4.7% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 25.2% | 21.8% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 20.6% | 14.2% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.6% | 1.3% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 64.1% | 73.6% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 17.9% | 22.3% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 10.1% | 11.5% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 0.86 | 1.52 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.37 | 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.
60.7% 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 100 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 62.5% 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 72 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 0.20 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 23% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 8% 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 | 60.7%CMS range 49.4–70.2 | 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 6.5–13.2 | 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 | 62.5% | 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 | 54.2% | 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 | 54.2% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 97.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 93.9% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 4.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 5.0% | 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 | 7.0%CMS range 4.0–12.6 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.11 | 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 120 beds and averages 112.9 residents a day — about 94% occupied, or roughly 7 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. 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 2.72 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.57 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.53 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 2.37 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 2.86 on weekdays — 17% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.66 to 0.35 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 fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 2 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
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.
31 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 21 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-11-20 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
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 immediately notify the resident representative of a significant change in resident condition for one of four residents in the survey sample, resident #1.The findings included:Resident #1's diagnoses included but were not limited to chronic atrial fibrillation, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, pleural effusion, muscle weakness, hypertension, Alzheimer's disease, osteoarthritis, repeated falls, anxiety disorder and acute on chronic congestive heart failure.The annual/5-day minimum data set (MDS) with an assessment reference date of 5/15/25 assigned the resident a brief interview for mental status (BIMS) score of 8 out of 15 indicating moderate cognitive impairment. In section GG- Functional Abilities, resident #1 was coded as requiring substantial/maximal assistance with toileting hygiene and partial/moderate assistance with transfers. Walking was coded as 8/8 not attempted due to medical condition or safety concerns. Resident #1 was coded as having falls within the last…
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 before2024-08-01 · 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 follow medical provider orders for 2 of 4 sampled residents (Resident #1 and Resident #4). The findings included: 1. For Resident #1, the facility staff failed to notify the medical provider of blood sugar readings less than 60 or greater than 450 on four (4) separate occasions during the month of April 2024. This was a closed record review. Resident #1's diagnosis list indicated diagnoses, which included, but not limited to Chronic Kidney Disease Stage 5, Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Chronic Respiratory Failure, Adult Failure to Thrive, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, and Dependence on Renal Dialysis. The minimum data set (MDS) with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 4/10/24 assigned the resident a brief interview for mental status (BIMS) summary score of 15 out of 15 indicating the resident was cognitively intact. Resident #1's comprehensive person-centered care plan included a focus area stating [Resident #1] has Diabetes Mellitus with an intervention for accu-checks as ordered. Resident #1'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 before2024-08-01 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
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 ensure 2 of 4 sampled residents were free of significant medication errors (Resident #1 and Resident #4). The findings included: 1. For Resident #1, the facility staff failed to follow the medical provider orders for the administration of Novolog, a fast-acting insulin used to lower blood sugar levels, on 28 separate occasions. This was a closed record review. Resident #1's diagnosis list indicated diagnoses, which included, but not limited to Chronic Kidney Disease Stage 5, Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Chronic Respiratory Failure, Adult Failure to Thrive, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, and Dependence on Renal Dialysis. The minimum data set (MDS) with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 4/10/24 assigned the resident a brief interview for mental status (BIMS) summary score of 15 out of 15 indicating the resident was cognitively intact. Resident #1's comprehensive person-centered care plan included a focus area stating [Resident #1] has Diabetes Mellitus with an intervention stating Diabetes…
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 · E2023-12-14 · tag F0730 — patternObserve each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
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 complete reviews of nurse aides at least every 12 months and failed to provide in-service education based on the outcome of these reviews. The findings were: The facility administration failed to complete performance reviews for nurse aides at least every 12 months and therefore failed to provide in-service education which was based on the outcome of the performance reviews. After completing the sufficient and competent nurse staff task, the surveyor asked the human resource manager about nurse aide performance reviews. The nurse aides had received in-service education during their employment however, the education was not based on the outcome of these reviews. On 12/13/23 at the end of day meeting with the administrator and director of nursing (DON), the concern about not having evidence of nurse aide performance reviews was discussed. The administrator said the facility had not provided performance reviews in years and he was unsure why. A policy and procedure with the subject titled, Employee j…
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 before2023-12-14 · 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, clinical record review, and facility document review, the facility staff failed to follow the providers order for 1 of 24 current residents, Residents #267. The findings included: For Resident #267, the facility nursing staff failed to administer the medications Gabapentin and Risperdal per the providers orders. Resident #267's diagnoses included, but were not limited to, diabetes, bipolar disorder, peripheral vascular disease, and orthopedic aftercare. There was no completed minimum data set assessment for Resident #267. This resident was alert and orientated to self and place. Resident #267's care plan included the intervention give all medications as ordered. Resident #267's clinical record included provider orders for Gabapentin 600 mg give 0.5 tablet by mouth every 12 hours for neuropathy and Risperdal 2 mg by mouth every 12 hours related to bipolar disorder the order dates were documented as 12/05/23. A review of the clinical record revealed that on 12/05/23 at 9:00 p.m. and 12/06/23 at 9:00 a.m. the facility nursing staff documented a 9 for 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 · Dcited before2023-12-14 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, resident interview, staff interview, and facility document review, the facility staff failed to ensure the resident environment was free of accident hazards for 1 of 24 current residents, Resident #96. The findings were: Resident #96 possessed both cigarettes and lighter in his room which was against facility policy. The smoking assessment coded Resident #96 as an unsafe smoker prior to the surveyors asking about the facility's smoking policy. Resident #96's admission record contained a list of diagnoses which included but were not limited to chronic kidney disease, major depressive disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, unsteadiness on feet, malignant neoplasm of prostate, secondary malignant neoplasm of bone, disorientation, and psychophysiologic insomnia. The minimum data set with an assessment reference date of 11/24/23 coded the resident's brief interview for mental status a 12 out of 15 in Section C (cognitive patterns). The care plan included but was not limited to a focus area that read the resident was a smoker with interventions which included but…
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 before2023-12-14 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review the facility staff failed to ensure medications were available for administration for one of 24 residents, Resident #93. The findings include: For Resident #93, the facility staff failed to ensure the medication Zyprexa was available for administration. Resident #93's face sheet listed diagnoses which included but not limited to dementia, bipolar disorder, depression, and unspecified mood disorder. Resident #93's most recent minimum data set with an assessment reference data of 11/07/23 coded the resident as having both long- and short-term memory loss with severely impaired cognitive skills for daily decision making. Resident #93's comprehensive care plan was reviewed and contained care plans for . has potential to be physically aggressive & have increased sexual behaviors r/t Dementia and . uses psychotropic medications r/t dementia with behaviors, BIPOLAR d/o (disorder), depression, insomnia. Resident #93's clinical record was reviewed and contained a physician's order summary which read in part,…
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 before2023-12-14 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interview, clinical record review and facility staff review the facility staff failed to ensure three of 24 residents was free of significant medication errors, Resident #82, Resident #215 and #267. The findings included: 1. For Resident #82 the facility staff failed to administer the anticoagulant medication, Xarelto. Resident #82's face sheet listed diagnoses which included but not limited to Alzheimer's disease, atrial fibrillation, and hypertension. Resident #82's most recent minimum data set with an assessment reference date of 09/07/23 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 #82's comprehensive care plan was reviewed and contained a care plan for . is on anticoagulant therapy r/t (related to) Atrial fibrillation. Interventions for this care plan include Administer ANTICOAGULANT medications as ordered by physician. Resident #82's clinical record was reviewed and contained a physician's order summary which read in…
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 · D2023-12-14 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and staff interview, the facility staff failed to dispose of expired laboratory (blood) tubes in 1 of 4 medication rooms. The 100-hall medication room. The findings included: The medication room on 100-hall contained 6 expired laboratory tubes. On [DATE] at 9:10 a.m., the surveyor and Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #4 completed an observation of the medication room on 100-hall. This medication room was observed to contain 6 yellow top laboratory tubes with an expiration date of [DATE]. The expired laboratory tubes were mixed in with laboratory tubes that were not expired. LPN #4 acknowledged the laboratory tubes were out of date and placed the expired blood tubes in the sharps box for disposable. On [DATE] at 1:30 p.m., the Administrator and Director of Nursing were made aware of the issue regarding the expired laboratory tubes. No further information regarding this issue was provided to the survey team prior to the exit conference.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-04-07 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
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 consult with the physician the need to review current treatment due to possible adverse medication interactions for 2 of 23 residents in the survey sample, Residents #29 and #359. For Resident #29, the facility staff failed to consult the physician regarding drug protocol alerts for possible drug interactions between Xanax (a benzodiazepine used to treat anxiety) and Norco (a narcotic used to treat pain), Xanax and Nizoral Shampoo (a topical antifungal), and Xanax and Depakote Sprinkles (an antiepileptic used to treat seizures). For Resident #359, the facility staff failed to consult the physician regarding drug protocol alerts for possible drug interactions between trazodone (a serotonin modulator used to treat depression) and buspirone (an anxiolytic used to treat anxiety), and remeron (an antidepressant used to treat depression) and buspirone. The findings included: 1. Resident #29's diagnosis list indicated diagnoses, which included, but not limited to Vascular Dementia, Chronic Obstructive…
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 · D2022-04-07 · tag F0637 — isolatedAssess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interviews, clinical record review, and facility document review, the facility staff failed to complete a Significant Change Minimum Data (MDS) assessment for 1 of 23 sampled residents, Resident #160. The findings include: Resident #160's comprehensive minimum data set (MDS) assessment, with an assessment reference date of 2/23/22, was dated as completed on 3/1/22. Resident #160 was assessed as able to make self understood and as able to understand others. Resident #160's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) summary score was documented as an eight (8) out of 15; this indicated moderate cognitive impairment. Resident #160 was documented as requiring assistance with bed mobility, transfers, toilet use, and personal hygiene. Resident #160's diagnose included, but were not limited to: high blood pressure, thyroid disease, arthritis, and Alzheimer's disease. Resident #160 was assessed as not having unhealed pressure ulcers. Resident #160 was assessed as not having an indwelling urinary catheter. Resident #160's clinical documentation indicated, on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-04-07 · 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 review and revise the comprehensive person-centered plan of care for 1 of 23 residents in the survey sample, Resident #29. Resident #29's comprehensive person-centered plan of care was not revised following discovery of the resident inappropriately touching another resident. The findings included: Resident #29's diagnosis list indicated diagnoses, which included, but not limited to Vascular Dementia, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Generalized Anxiety Disorder, Pulmonary Hypertension, and Peripheral Vascular Disease. The most recent quarterly MDS (minimum data set) with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 2/07/22 assigned the resident a BIMS (brief interview for mental status) summary score of 0 out of 15 indicating the resident was severely cognitively impaired. A review of Resident #29's clinical record revealed a physician's progress note dated 11/30/21 stating in part On rounds 11-23-21 for eval (evaluation) of dementia and sexual behaviors. (He/she) recently had…
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 · D2022-04-07 · 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, staff interview, and clinical record review the facility staff failed to provide ADL (activities of daily living) care for a dependent resident for 1 of 23 residents, Residents #69. The facility staff failed to provide nail care. The findings included: Resident #69's diagnoses included, but were not limited to, chronic kidney disease, anxiety disorder, hypertension, anorexia, adult failure to thrive, and benign prostatic hyperplasia. Section C (cognitive patterns) of Resident #69's quarterly MDS assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 02/15/22 included a BIMS (brief interview for mental status) summary score of 00. Section G (functional status) was coded 3/2 for personal hygiene to indicate the resident required extensive assistance of one person for this task. Resident #69's comprehensive care plan included the focus area-Has ADL self-care performance deficit related to diagnosis Alzheimer's dementia with behaviors, confusion. Interventions included, Check nail length and trim and clean on bath day and as necessary. 04/05/22 11:39 a.m., toenails…
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 before2022-04-07 · 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, clinical record review, and facility document review, the facility staff failed to follow physician's orders for 2 of 23 residents in the survey sample, Resident #7 and #110. For Resident #7, the facility staff failed to perform weekly skin assessments as ordered by the physician. For Resident #110, the facility staff failed to transcribe a physician's order from the hospital discharge summary for wound care. The findings included: 1. Resident #7's diagnosis list indicated diagnoses, which included, but not limited to Epilepsy, Alzheimer's Disease, Orthostatic Hypotension, Generalized Anxiety Disorder, Repeated Falls, Chronic Kidney Disease, and Essential Hypertension. The most recent admission MDS (minimum data set) with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 1/07/22 assigned the resident a BIMS (brief interview for mental status) summary score of 2 out of 15 indicating the resident was severely cognitively impaired. Resident #7 was coded as requiring extensive assistance with bed mobility, transfers, toilet use, and personal hygiene. The resident was coded…
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 · D2022-04-07 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interview, clinical record review and facility document review the facility staff failed to follow up on monthly drug regimen reviews for 2 of 23 residents, Resident #72 and Resident #74. For Resident #72, the facility staff failed to follow up on pharmacist recommendations for the months of September 2021 and December 2021. For Resident #74, the facility staff failed to follow up on a pharmacist recommendation for the month of September 2021. The findings included: 1. Resident #72's face sheet included diagnoses which included but not limited to Alzheimer's disease, dementia, Type 2 diabetes mellitus, depression, hypertension, and gastroesophageal reflux disease. Resident #72's most recent annual MDS (minimum data set) with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 02/21/22 assigned the resident a BIMS (brief interview for mental status) score of 2 out of 15 in section C, cognitive patterns. This indicates that the resident is severely cognitively impaired. Resident #72's clinical record was reviewed and contained monthly MRR's (medication regimen review) dated 09/24/21…
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 · D2022-04-07 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interview, clinical record review, facility document review, and during a medication pass and pour observation, the facility staff failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than 5% there were 3 errors in 30 opportunities for a medication error rate of 10%. These errors effected Residents #12 and #42. The findings included: 1. Section C (cognitive patterns) of Resident #12's annual MDS (minimum data set) assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) 01/05/22 included a BIMS (brief interview for mental status) summary score of 3 out of a possible 15 points. The clinical record included the diagnoses Alzheimer's, dementia, glaucoma, and chronic kidney disease. 04/06/22 7:48 a.m., LPN (licensed practical nurse) #1 prepared Resident #12's morning medications to include Senna 8.6 mg 2 tablets. Resident #12's clinical record included a physicians order for Senna 8.6 mg give 1 tablet by mouth two times a day for constipation. 04/06/22 9:34 a.m., LPN #1 stated they administered Senna 2 tablets. LPN #1 reviewed the clinical record and stated the order read 1 tablet…
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 · D2022-04-07 · tag F0888 — isolatedEnsure staff are vaccinated for COVID-19
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and facility document reviews, the facility staff failed to correctly implement contingency plans for staff who were not fully vaccinated for COVID-19. The findings include: Two (2) staff members (SMs), with COVID-19 vaccine exemptions, were reviewed as part of the COVID-19 immunization review (SM #21 and SM #22). On 4/6/22 at 9:30 a.m., SM #21 was observed to have a KN95 mask. SM #21 reported, as part of the facility's exemption contingency plan, they had to wear the mask when not eating or drinking. SM #21 also reported they had to have weekly COVID-19 test completed. On 4/6/22 at 9:40, SM #21 was asked about wearing a N95 mask verses a KN95 mask; SM #21 indicated their understand was the KN95 was okay to wear. On 4/6/22 at 9:35 a.m., SM #22 was observed to be wearing a KN95 mask. SM #22 reported, as part of the facility's exemption contingency plan, they had to wear the mask. SM #22 also reported they had to have weekly COVID-19 test completed. SM #22 was asked if the mask should be a N95 mask instead of a KN95; SM #22 indicated they believed…
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 · D2019-01-31 · 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 and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to ensure a complete and accurate DDNR (Durable Do Not Resuscitate) for 2 of 26 residents in the survey sample (Resident #99 and Resident #95). The findings included: 1. The facility staff failed to ensure a complete and accurate DDNR (Durable Do Not Resuscitate) for Resident #99. Resident #99 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses, but not limited to atrial fibrillation, high blood pressure, diabetes and dementia. On the 5 day admission MDS (Minimum Data Set) with an ARD (Assessment Reference Date) of 12/20/18, the resident was coded as having a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) score of 3 out of a possible score of 15. The resident was coded as requiring extensive assistance of 2 staff members for dressing and personal hygiene. Resident #99 was also coded as being totally dependent on 2 staff members for bathing. The surveyor conducted a clinical record review on Resident #99 on 1/30/19. 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 · D2019-01-31 · 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 ensure an accurate MDS (Minimum Data Set) for 1 of 26 residents in the survey sample (Resident #43). The findings included: The facility staff failed to code Resident #43's fall, which occurred on 1/13/18 on the MDS with an ARD (Assessment Reference Date) of 4/10/18. Resident #43 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses of, but not limited to anemia, high blood pressure, dementia and respiratory failure. On the quarterly MDS with an ARD (Assessment Reference Date) of 11/26/18 which coded the resident as having a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) score of 10 out of a possible score of 15. Resident #43 was also coded as requiring extensive assistance of 2 staff members for dressing and personal hygiene and was totally dependent on 2 staff members for bathing. The surveyor performed a clinical review of Resident #44's record. During this review, the surveyor noted nursing documentation on 1/13/18,…
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 · D2019-01-31 · tag F0646 — isolatedNotify the appropriate authorities when residents with MD or ID services has a significant change in condition.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on facility document review, staff interview and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to notify the MD (medical doctor) of a significant change for 1 of 26 residents in the survey sample (Resident #43). The findings included: The facility staff failed to notify the MD (medical doctor) of a significant change for Resident #43. Resident #43 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses of, but not limited to anemia, high blood pressure, dementia and respiratory failure. On the quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set) with an ARD (Assessment Reference Date) of 11/26/18 which coded the resident as having a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) score of 10 out of a possible score of 15. Resident #43 was also coded as requiring extensive assistance of 2 staff members for dressing and personal hygiene and was totally dependent on 2 staff members for bathing. The surveyor performed a clinical review of Resident #43's record on 1/29/19 through 1/31/19. During this review, 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 · D2019-01-31 · 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 staff interview and clinical record review the facility staff failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for 1 of 26 Residents, Resident #47. Resident #47 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including schizophrenia, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, gastroesophageal reflux disease, anxiety, and dementia. On the admission minimum data set assessment (MDS) with assessment reference date 12/6/18, the resident scored 11/15 on the brief interview for mental status and was assessed as without symptoms of delirium, psychosis, or behaviors affecting care or others. During an interview on 1/29/19, the resident indicated that she smoked cigarettes. The resident was on the list of smokers living in the facility. The surveyor observed the resident smoking outside with a group of residents. During clinical record review on 1/29/19, the surveyor noted a safe smoking assessment was conducted on 11/29/18. There was no conclusion concerning safety to smoke. That section was blank. Smoking was not…
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 before2019-01-31 · 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 clinical record review and staff interview, the facility staff failed to review and revise the comprehensive care plan for 2 of 26 Residents in the survey sample, Resident # 25 and Resident # 86. The findings included 1. The facility staff failed to ensure that the comprehensive care plan for Resident # 25 included person centered non-pharmacological interventions associated with the use of Zyprexa and Abilify for Resident # 25. Resident # 25 was a [AGE] year-old-female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included but were not limited to, schizophrenia, mood disorder, depression, and unspecified intellectual disabilities. The clinical record for Resident # 25 was reviewed on 1/29/19 at 3:00 pm. The most recent MDS (minimum data set) assessment was an annual assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 11/14/18. Section C of the MDS assesses cognitive patterns. In Section C0500, the facility staff documented that Resident # 25 had a BIMS (brief interview for mental status)…
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 · D2019-01-31 · 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 practice for 2 of 26 residents in the survey sample (Resident #13 and Resident #43). The findings included: 1. The facility staff failed to perform an assessment on Resident #13 when he returned to the facility from a hospital stay. Resident #13 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE]. On the annual MDS (Minimum Data Set) with an ARD (Assessment Reference Date) of 11/6/18, coded the resident as having a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) score of 12 out of possible score of 15. Resident #13 was also coded as requiring extensive assistance of 1 staff member for dressing and personal hygiene and totally dependent on 1 staff member for bathing. The surveyor performed a clinical record review on 01/31/19 at 10:45 am. During this review, it was noted that the facility staff failed to perform an assessment when the resident had returned to facility from 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 before2019-01-31 · 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 clinical record review, Resident interview, and staff interview, the facility staff failed to follow physician's orders for 2 of Residents in the survey sample, Resident # 40 and Resident # 86. The findings included: 1. The facility staff failed to follow physician's orders for Metolazone for Resident # 40. Resident # 40 was a [AGE] year-old-female who was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a readmission date of 11/14/18. Diagnoses included but were not limited to, congestive heart failure, type 2 diabetes mellitus, atrial fibrillation, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The clinical record for Resident # 40 was reviewed on 1/29/18 at 3:32 pm. The most recent MDS (minimum data set) assessment was a 14-day scheduled assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 11/27/18. Section C of the MDS assesses cognitive patterns. In Section C0500, the facility staff documented that Resident # 40 had a BIMS (brief interview for mental status) score of 15 out of 15, which indicated…
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 before2019-01-31 · 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 2. The facility staff failed to complete the smoking evaluation for Resident #99. Resident #99 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses, but not limited to atrial fibrillation, high blood pressure, diabetes and dementia. On the 5 day, admission MDS (Minimum Data Set) with an ARD (Assessment Reference Date) of 12/20/18, the resident was coded as having a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) score of 3 out of a possible score of 15. Resident #99 was coded as requiring extensive assistance of 2 staff members for dressing and personal hygiene. Resident #99 was also coded as being totally dependent on 2 staff members for bathing. The surveyor observed Resident #99 on 1/29/19 at 1:48 pm. The resident was outside smoking with a smoking apron over resident. One staff member was observed to be outside with the residents that were smoking. The surveyor conducted a clinical record review on Resident #99 on 1/30/19. During this review, it was noted by the surveyor that the Safe Smoking…
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 · D2019-01-31 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, Resident interview, staff interview, and clinical record review the facility staff failed to obtain physicians orders for the use of oxygen for 1 of 26 Residents, Resident # 40. The findings included The facility staff failed to obtain orders for oxygen for Resident # 40. Resident # 40 was a [AGE] year-old-female who was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a readmission date of 11/14/18. Diagnoses included but were not limited to, congestive heart failure, type 2 diabetes mellitus, atrial fibrillation, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The clinical record for Resident # 40 was reviewed on 1/29/18 at 3:32 pm. The most recent MDS (minimum data set) assessment was a 14-day scheduled assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 11/27/18. Section C of the MDS assesses cognitive patterns. In Section C0500, the facility staff documented that Resident # 40 had a BIMS (brief interview for mental status) score of 15 out of 15, which indicated that Resident # 40 was…
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 before2019-01-31 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to ensure that a physician ordered medication was available for administration for 1 of 26 residents in the survey sample (Resident #44). The findings included: The facility staff failed to ensure a physician ordered medication, Hydrocodone, was available for administration for Resident #44. Resident #44 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses of, but not limited to heart failure, high blood pressure, diabetes and anxiety disorder. On the quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set) with an ARD (Assessment Reference Date) of 11/27/18, the resident was coded as having a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) score of 4 out of a possible score of 15. Resident #44 was also coded as requiring extensive assistance from 2 staff members for dressing and being totally dependent on 2 staff members for personal hygiene and bathing. The surveyor performed a clinical record review on Resident #44 on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2019-01-31 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary 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 staff interview and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to monitor targeted behaviors for 1 of 26 residents in the survey sample. (Resident #44) The findings included: The facility staff failed to monitor targeted behaviors while Resident #44 was receiving Ativan for anxiety. Resident #44 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses of, but not limited to heart failure, high blood pressure, diabetes and anxiety disorder. On the quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set) with an ARD (Assessment Reference Date) of 11/27/18, the resident was coded as having a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) score of 4 out of a possible score of 15. Resident #44 was also coded as requiring extensive assistance from 2 staff members for dressing and being totally dependent on 2 staff members for personal hygiene and bathing. The surveyor performed a clinical record review on Resident #44 on 1/31/19. During this review, the surveyor noted the resident had a physician order for Lorazepam…
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 · D2019-01-31 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview, clinical record review, and facility document review, the facility staff failed to ensure that 2 of 26 Residents were free of unnecessary psychotropic medications, Resident # 95 and Resident #25. The findings included 1. The facility staff failed to monitor behaviors associated with the use of psychotropic medications for Resident # 25. Resident # 95 was a [AGE] year-old-male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included but were not limited to dementia, type 2 diabetes mellitus, chronic atrial fibrillation, and anxiety. The clinical record for Resident # 95 was reviewed on 1/29/19 at 1:26 pm. The most recent MDS (minimum data set) assessment was a quarterly assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 1/8/19. Section C of the MDS assesses cognitive patterns. In Section C0500, the facility staff documented that Resident # 95 had a BIMS (brief interview for mental status) score of 3 out of 15, which indicated that Resident # 95's cognitive status was severely…
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 · D2019-01-31 · 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 and clinical record review the facility staff failed to ensure a complete and accurate clinical record for 1 of 26 residents in the survey sample (Resident #43). The findings included: The facility staff failed to document in the nursing notes when Resident #43 had returned from the ER (emergency room) on 5/20/18. Resident #43 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses of, but not limited to anemia, high blood pressure, dementia and respiratory failure. On the quarterly MDS with an ARD (Assessment Reference Date) of 11/26/18 which coded the resident as having a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) score of 10 out of a possible score of 15. Resident #43 was also coded as requiring extensive assistance of 2 staff members for dressing and personal hygiene and was totally dependent on 2 staff members for bathing. The surveyor performed a clinical review of Resident #43's record on 1/29/19 through 1/31/19. During this review, the surveyor noted no nursing…
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 · D2019-01-31 · 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 observation, staff interview, clinical record review and facility document review the facility staff failed to follow established infection control procedures for 2 of 26 Residents, #49 and #159. 1. For Resident #49 the facility staff failed to post signage outside of the Resident's room, and staff failed to don proper PPE (personal protective equipment) prior to assisting with Resident care. Resident #49 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Diagnoses included but not limited to anemia, atrial fibrillation, congestive heart failure, benign prostatic hyperplasia, diabetes mellitus, hypothyroidism, arthritis, Alzheimer's disease, dementia, anxiety, depression, schizophrenia, ataxia, dysphagia, and insomnia. The most recent MDS (minimum data set) with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 12/04/18 coded the Resident as 3 out of 15 in section C, cognitive patterns. Section H, bowel and bladder, coded the Resident as being always incontinent of urine. This is an annual MDS. On…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“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.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to AVARDIS HEALTH — 38 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 | 5 of 5 | 2.0 | +3.0 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 4 of 5 | 1.9 | +2.1 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 2.3 | -0.3 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 3.2 | +1.8 vs chain |
The other 37 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.0★, per CMS)
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| INDEPENDENCE PARENTCO LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 05/01/2025 |
| GRAYSON HOLDCO LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 05/01/2025 |
| VAOP HOLDCO LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 05/01/2025 |
| CLARK, ALYSSA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/01/2025 |
| HOBACK, TIFFANY | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/01/2025 |
| SNF MGR LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/20/2025 |
| JONES, TEQUILLA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/01/2025 |
| RIGGINS, BRIDGET | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/01/2025 |
| STURGILL FANT, VANESSA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/01/2025 |
| SWORD, ROBERT | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/01/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 19 rows in the source record cover these 10 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
4 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.
About 74% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $549K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. 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 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 495331. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2023-12-14, 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.