Heritage Hall-Leesburg
122 Morven Park Road NW, Leesburg, VA 20176 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 164 certified beds · (703) 777-8700 Medicare & Medicaid certified
On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.
- 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
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (30% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
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) | 3 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 held steady at 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 | 14.9% | 14.9% | 15.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 1.5% | 5.4% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.2% | 0.4% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.7% | 1.6% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 8.6% | 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 | 3.7% | 3.6% | 3.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 17.0% | 15.6% | 16.1% | typical |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 17.9% | 20.6% | 18.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 94.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 2.3% | 4.7% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 21.3% | 21.8% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 8.5% | 14.2% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.3% | 1.3% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 99.6% | 73.6% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 16.0% | 22.3% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 5.2% | 11.5% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 0.63 | 1.52 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.21 | 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.
51.9% 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 439 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 66.1% 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 165 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 0.41 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 70% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 26% 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 | 51.9%CMS range 47.7–56.7 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.7%CMS range 7.9–12.3 | 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 | 66.1% | 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 | 63.6% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 63.6% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 99.6% | 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 | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 98.8% | 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 | 0.4% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 4.4%CMS range 3.0–6.3 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.91 | 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 164 beds and averages 148.7 residents a day — about 91% occupied, or roughly 15 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 3.37 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.77 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.86 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 2.92 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.55 on weekdays — 18% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.88 to 0.48 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 30% is below the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
11 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Potential for harm · E2025-01-29 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — patternEnsure 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
Based on staff interview, clinical record review, and facility document review, staff interview, the facility staff failed to maintain a resident free of unnecessary medications for one of 44 residents in the survey sample, Resident #97 (R97). The findings include: For (R97), facility staff failed to administer a prn (as needed) the pain medication Oxycodone (1) within the physician ordered pain level parameters. (R97) was admitted to the facility with a diagnosis that included but was not limited to back pain. On the most recent MDS (minimum data set), a quarterly assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 01/22/2025, R97 scored 15 out of 15 on the BIMS (brief interview for mental status), indicating (R15) was cognitively intact for making daily decisions. The physician's order for R97 documented in part, oxycodone (pain medication) HCl (hydrochloride) Oral Tablet 5 (five) MG Milligrams). Give 1 (one) tablet by mouth every 6 (six) hours as needed for pain as needed for pain rate >6/10 (greater than six out of ten). Order Date: 11/26/2024. The eMAR (electronic medication…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-01-29 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
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 provide accommodations of resident needs by ensuring the call bell (a device with a button that can be pushed to alert staff when assistance is needed) was within reach for two of 44 residents in the survey sample, Residents #19, (R19) and R67. The findings include: 1. For R19, the facility staff failed to keep the call bell within reach. R19 was admitted to the facility with a diagnosis that included by not limited to difficulty breathing. On the most recent comprehensive MDS (minimum data set), a quarterly assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 12/07/2024, R19 scored 12 out of 15 on the BIMS (brief interview for mental status), indicating R19 was moderately impaired of cognition for making daily decisions. On 01/27/25 at approximately 7:44 p.m. an observation revealed R19 lying in bed. When asked to locate the call bell R19 was unable to find it and stated she did not know where 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 before2025-01-29 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, resident interview, staff interview, clinical record review, and facility document review, the facility staff failed to provide respiratory care and services for one of 44 residents in the survey sample, Resident #32 (R32). The findings include: For R32, facility staff failed to store the incentive spirometer (1) in a sanitary manner. R32 was admitted to the facility with a diagnosis that included by not limited to generalized muscle weakness. On the most recent comprehensive MDS (minimum data set), a quarterly assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 12/23/2024, R32 scored 15 out of 15 on the BIMS (brief interview for mental status), indicating R32 was cognitively intact for making daily decisions. On 01/28/25 at approximately 8:18 a.m., an observed revealed R32 lying in bed. Observation of an incentive spirometer laying on top of the bedside table inside a plastic bag. Further observation revealed the mouthpiece of the incentive spirometer hanging outside of the bag resting on the bedside table. On 01/28/25 at approximately 11:20 a.m., an…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-01-29 · 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 observation, staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to ensure a medication error rate less than five percent for one of three residents observed during the medication administration observation, Resident #23. During the medication administration observation, two errors out of 29 opportunities occurred, resulting in a 6.9 percent medication error rate. The findings include: For Resident #23 (R23), LPN (licensed practical nurse) #1 failed to administer gabapentin and Breo Ellipta per physician's orders. A review of R23's clinical record revealed a physician's order dated 1/29/24 for gabapentin 100 mg (milligrams)- one capsule by mouth in the morning for pain and a physician's order dated 5/2/24 for Breo Ellipta 100/25 mcg (micrograms)- one inhalation in the morning for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (lung disease), rinse mouth with water post use. On 1/28/25 at 7:38 a.m., an observation of LPN #1 preparing and administering medications to R23 was conducted. LPN #1 administered two capsules (instead of 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 · Ecited before2022-09-21 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, and facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to store food in a sanitary manner in 1 of 1 facility kitchens. The findings include: On 9/20/22 at 12:15 PM, a tour of the facility kitchen was conducted with OSM #1 (Other Staff Member) the Dietary Manager. In the walk-in freezer, a box of dinner rolls was noted to have been opened, and the bag inside with the dinner rolls was left open to air, exposing the rolls to the freezer environment. When asked if the box should be left open, OSM #1 stated that it should be closed and sealed. He removed the box and discarded it. The facility policy, Cost Containment - Food Storage: General was reviewed. This policy documented, 6. All foods that have been opened and partially used shall be dated and sealed before returning to a storage area. On 9/21/22 at 1:05 PM, ASM #1 (Administrative Staff Member) was made aware of the findings. No further information was provided by the end of the survey.
- Potential for harm · D2022-09-21 · 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
Based on clinical record review, staff interview and facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to conduct a review of the advance directive for one of 40 residents in the survey sample, Resident # 44 (R44). The findings include: For (R44) the facility staff failed to evidence documentation of a discussion regarding advance directives for Resident # 44. On the most recent MDS (minimum data set), a quarterly assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 07/12/2022, the resident scored 15 out of 15 on the BIMS (brief interview for mental status), indicating the resident was cognitively intact for making daily decisions. Review of the facility's Advance Directive Acknowledgement for (R44) dated 08/24/2020 revealed that (R44) executed an advance directive and provided the facility with a copy of the advance directive. The facility's social service note for (R44) dated 02/05/2022 documented in part, Resident will remain a DNR code status. Further review of the social service note failed to evidence discussion of an advance directive. The POS…
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 · D2022-09-21 · tag F0640 — isolatedEncode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of 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, clinical record review, and facility document review, it was determined the facility staff failed to accurately code an MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment for two of 40 residents, Resident #2 and Resident #433. The facility staff failed to code an MDS (minimum data set) discharge assessment for Resident #2 and Resident #433. The findings include: 1. Resident #2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged home on 4/27/22. The most recent MDS (minimum data set) assessment, a 5 day Medicare assessment, with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 4/27/22, coded the resident as scoring a 10 out of 15 on the BIMS (brief interview for mental status) score, indicating the resident was moderately cognitively impaired. Further review of Resident #2's MDS dated [DATE], the last MDS done for this resident revealed Section A0310 Type of Assessment: F: Entry/Discharge Reporting: revealed coding of 99 (none of the above). MDS Section A2000 discharge date : revealed no discharge date entered. A…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-09-21 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, clinical record review, and facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to follow the comprehensive care plan for one of 40 residents in the survey sample; Resident #6. The findings include: For Resident #6, the facility staff failed to implement the comprehensive care plan for administering oxygen at the ordered rate. Resident #6 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. On the most recent MDS (Minimum Data Set), a quarterly assessment dated [DATE], the resident was coded as being cognitively intact in ability to make daily decisions. The resident was coded as being on oxygen therapy. On 9/20/22 at 12:30 PM and 9/21/22 at 8:05 AM, Resident #6 was observed in bed, wearing the nasal cannula for the oxygen. The oxygen concentrator was set for 2.5 liters per minute. A review of the comprehensive care plan revealed one dated 3/5/20 for At risk for respiratory/cardiac complications This care plan included an intervention dated 12/12/21 for O2 per…
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 before2022-09-21 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, clinical record review, and facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to administer oxygen at the physician ordered rate for 1 of 40 residents in the survey sample; Resident #6. The findings include: For Resident #6, the facility staff failed to administer oxygen at the physician ordered rate. Resident #6 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. On the most recent MDS (Minimum Data Set), a quarterly assessment dated [DATE], the resident was coded as being cognitively intact in ability to make daily decisions. The resident was coded as being on oxygen therapy. A review of the clinical record revealed a physician's order dated 12/21/21 for O2 (oxygen) on 2L (two liters) via NC (nasal cannula) cont (continuous). On 9/20/22 at 12:30 PM and 9/21/22 at 8:05 AM, Resident #6 was observed in bed, wearing the nasal cannula for the oxygen. The oxygen concentrator was set for 2.5 liters per minute. On 9/21/22 at 8:10 AM an interview was conducted with…
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 · D2021-05-05 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on resident interview, observation, staff interview and facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to maintain a clean and homelike environment for one of four shower rooms observed in the facility, (Unit two shower room). The facility staff failed to maintain the shower room on Unit two in a sanitary manner. The findings include: On 5/4/2021 at approximately 4:40 p.m., an interview was conducted with Resident #108. Resident #108 stated that the care they received at the facility was excellent and the staff were wonderful however there was always visible mold in the shower room when they took a shower. Resident #108 stated that they were a former housekeeper and noticed things like that. Resident #108 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included but were not limited to heart failure (1) and diabetes (2). Resident #108's most recent MDS (minimum data set), a quarterly assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 4/19/21, coded the resident as scoring a 15 on the staff assessment for mental status (BIMS) of a score of 0 - 15,…
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 before2021-05-05 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, and facility document review it was determined facility staff failed to discard food items past their use-by date in one of three pantry/nourishment rooms observed, (Unit one pantry room). The facility staff failed to discard four bottles of Ensure (nutritional supplement drink) that were past their use-by date and available for resident use in the Unit one pantry/nourishment room in the facility. The findings include: On 5/4/2021 at approximately 9:45 a.m., an observation was made of the refrigerator located in the pantry/nourishment room on Unit one at the facility. Observations revealed two Ensure French Vanilla flavored 11 fl. oz. (fluid ounce) bottles labeled with a resident name and room number. The two bottles were observed with a manufacturer's use-by date of 1JAN2021 (1/1/2021). Additional observations revealed another Ensure French Vanilla flavored 11 fl. oz. bottle labeled with a resident name and room number with a manufacturer use-by date of 1OCT2020 (10/1/2020). Further observation of the Unit one refrigerator revealed one Ensure…
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 HERITAGE HALL — 15 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 | 4.1 | +0.9 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 4 of 5 | 3.7 | +0.3 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 2.4 | +0.6 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 3.9 | +1.1 vs chain |
The other 14 homes this chain runs (chain average 4.1★, 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 | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| EAST, THOMAS | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER | since 01/22/2018 |
| HOPKINS, WILLIAM | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 01/22/2018 |
| DALTON, BRAD | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | since 04/21/2014 |
| DALTON, ROBERT | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/22/2018 |
| GALLANT, CASSANDRA | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | since 07/11/2024 |
| AMERICAN HEALTHCARE LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 11/22/2014 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 11 rows in the source record cover these 6 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 $1.5M paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.
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 495261. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-01-29, 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.