Our Lady Of The Valley
650 North Jefferson Street, Roanoke, VA 24016 · Non profit - Church related · 70 certified beds · (540) 345-5111 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
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- its last standard health inspection was over 3 years ago — the star rating may not reflect current conditions
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 4 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 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 | 15.4% | 14.9% | 15.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 1.6% | 5.4% | 5.4% | better |
| 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 | 0.0% | 1.6% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.7% | 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 | 6.3% | 3.6% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 23.1% | 15.6% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 20.5% | 20.6% | 18.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 94.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.8% | 4.7% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 28.4% | 21.8% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 3.2% | 14.2% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.8% | 1.3% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 96.4% | 73.6% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 34.3% | 22.3% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 8.9% | 11.5% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.69 | 1.52 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.16 | 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.
63.2% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 251 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 67.6% 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 139 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 0.16 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 14% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 5% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. 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 | 63.2%CMS range 57.5–67.8 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 15.1%CMS range 11.7–17.7 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | worse than 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 | 67.6% | 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 | 66.2% | 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 | 64.8% | 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 | 99.4% | 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 | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.6% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 2.2% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 6.3%CMS range 3.7–8.9 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.00 | 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 70 beds and averages 63.6 residents a day — about 91% occupied, or roughly 6 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 3.84 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.45 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.29 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.61 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.93 on weekdays — 8% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.53 to 0.26 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 45% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are 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 3 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
14 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-08-25 · 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 physician's orders for one of 21 residents, Resident #221. The findings included: For Resident #221, the facility staff failed to change the administration times for the medication Voltaren gel per the physician's order. Resident #221's face sheet listed diagnoses which included but not limited to dementia, anxiety, depression, psychotic disturbance, hypertension, arteriosclerotic heart disease and hypothyroidism. Resident #221's most recent MDS with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 09/26/22 assigned the resident a brief interview for mental status score of 8 out of 15 in section C, cognitive patterns. This indicates that the resident was moderately cognitively impaired. Resident #221's clinical record contained a physician's order summary for April 2022, which read in part 03/25/22 Change admin times on the Voltaren gel to 6 a, 12 noon, and 9 Per daughter request thank you. Resident #221's Treatment Administration History for April 2022 contained an entry which read in part, Order: Voltaren…
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 · D2023-08-25 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on resident and staff interview, resident observation and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to ensure that residents maintain acceptable parameters of nutrition for one of 23 residents in the survey sample, resident # 46. For resident # 46, the facility staff failed to follow the recommendations of the Registered Dietician (RD) to obtain another weight, and then do weekly weights if an actual weight loss is confirmed Additionally, the facility staff failed to ensure that resident # 46's weight loss was addressed by the physician. Resident # 46's diagnoses list included but was not limited to, Type II diabetes mellitus, gastro esophageal reflux disease, vitamin deficiency unspecified, mild protein calorie malnutrition, and chronic kidney disease. The most recent annual minimum data set (MDS) assessment with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 7/11/23 assigned resident # 46 a brief interview for mental status (BIMS) score of 14 indicating mild cognitive impairment. Under Section K, Swallowing and Nutritional Status, resident # 46 was coded as weighing 118…
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 · D2023-08-25 · 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, facility document review and record review, the facility staff failed to ensure the physician reviewed the pharmacy recommendations for one of 21 residents in the survey sample, Resident #4. The findings: The facility staff failed to ensure Resident #4's Medication Regimen Reviews (MRRs) was addressed by a medical provider. Resident #4's face sheet listed diagnoses included but were not limited to dementia, Alzheimer's disease with late onset, glaucoma, Bipolar II disorder, and traumatic subdural hemorrhage. The resident's minimum data set with an assessment reference date of 08/16/23 coded the resident a having a brief interview for mental status of 04 out of 15. Resident #4 was assessed as requiring assistance with bed mobility, transfers, dressing, toileting, and personal hygiene. Resident #4's clinical documentation included a pharmacy review for 03/14/23. The document read to see the pharmacist's review however the review was not found in the clinical record. The director of nursing (DON) was asked about the pharmacy recommendation and on 08/25/23…
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 · D2023-08-25 · 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 ensure care plan meetings were held in a timely manner for one of 21 residents, Resident #221. The findings included: For Resident #221 the facility staff failed to hold care plan meetings after each minimum data set (MDS) assessment. Resident #221's face sheet listed diagnoses which included but not limited to dementia, anxiety, depression, psychotic disturbance, hypertension, arteriosclerotic heart disease and hypothyroidism. Resident #221's most recent MDS with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 09/26/22 assigned the resident a brief interview for mental status score of 8 out of 15 in section C, cognitive patterns. This indicates that the resident was moderately cognitively impaired. Resident #221's clinical record was reviewed and contained Care Plan Conference Summary forms dated 11/03/21, 01/26/22, 04/20/22, 07/20/22, 10/12/22 and 11/09/22. Resident #221's clinical record contained care plan progress notes dated 01/20/21, 02/16/21, 06/09/21 and 11/03/21. There was no…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-08-25 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview, clinical record review and facility document review, facility staff failed to ensure the resident received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for one of 21 residents in the survey sample, Resident # 222. The findings: For Resident #222, one facility staff member transferred the resident from the bed to a chair instead of utilizing a mechanical lift with two+ staff members as required per the resident's care plan. During the transfer, the resident sat on her right lower leg which caused discomfort. An X-ray two days after the incident was negative for fracture. A subsequent X-ray three days after the incident indicated the resident had a tibial fracture. Resident #222's diagnoses included but were not limited to multiple sclerosis, adult failure to thrive, anxiety disorder, narcolepsy (chronic sleep disorder), dysphagia and other speech disturbances, neuralgia and neuritis (inflammation and nerve pain), age-related osteoporosis, insomnia and unspecified…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2021-04-15 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview and facility document review the facility staff failed to store, prepare and serve food in a safe and sanitary manner. The findings included: The facility staff failed to ensure serving pans in the facility were dry and clean and failed to date an opened package of dried pasta. During initial tour of the facility kitchen, conducted on 04/13/21 at approximately 1:45 pm, surveyor observed an opened package of macaroni noodles located on a shelf in the dry storage area. Surveyor could not locate an opened on date on the package. Surveyor asked the dining services manager if there was a date on the package and dining services manager stated that there was not, and removed the package. While continuing initial tour of the kitchen, surveyor observed a rack containing metal serving pans, nested together. Surveyor asked the dining services manager to separate the pans to allow surveyor to observe inside of pans, and when dining services manager did so, water ran from between the pans. Dining services manager stated that should not happen. Surveyor also…
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 before2021-04-15 · 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 interviews, clinical record reviews, and in the course of a complaint investigation, the facility staff failed to ensure that residents receive treatment and care by not following physician's orders for one (1) of 16 sampled residents (Resident #105). The findings include: Facility staff members failed to ensure Resident #105's medical provider orders, for (a) a head CT and (b) the medication Zyprexa, were implemented in a timely manner. Resident #105's minimum data set (MDS) assessment, with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 1/10/21, had the resident assessed as able to make self understood and as able to under others. Resident #105's Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) summary score was assessed as 13 out of 15. Resident #105 was assessed as requiring assistance with bed mobility, dressing, toilet use, personal hygiene, and bathing. Resident #105's diagnoses included, but were not limited to: anemia, heart disease, high blood pressure, anxiety, and vision problems. Resident #105 had a head CT scan ordered on 3/5/21 but this CT scan was not completed until…
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 before2021-04-15 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and staff interview, the facility staff failed to safely store medications in 1 of 2 medication rooms. This medication room contained expired medications. The findings included: The facility staff failed to dispose of expired medications in medication room [ROOM NUMBER]. On 04/13/2021 at 2:30 p.m., the (DON) director of nursing accompanied the surveyor to medication room [ROOM NUMBER]. This medication room contained an unlocked plastic box. Inside this box, the surveyor observed the following expired medications. 200 ml IV bag of Ciprofloxacin expiration date 03/2021, Cefepime 2-1 gram vials expiration date 10/2020, Ivanz 1 vial expiration date 04/2020, Vancomycin 1 gram expiration date 05/2020, Vancomycin 1 gram expiration date 04/2020, Gentamicin 80 mg/2 ml 8 vials expiration date 09/2020. The box was labeled with a different pharmacy name then the one currently being used by the facility. The DON stated they would take the box to their office and call the pharmacy. On 04/14/2021 at 3:08…
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 · D2021-04-15 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, clinical record review, and facility document review, the facility staff failed to maintain an effective infection prevention and control program for 1 of 16 residents, Resident #12. The findings included: The facility staff failed to complete hand hygiene during a wound care observation. The (EHR) electronic health record included the diagnoses, adult failure to thrive, diabetes, and chronic kidney disease. Section C (cognitive patterns) of Resident #12's admission (MDS) minimum data set assessment with an (ARD) assessment reference date of 01/17/2021 included a (BIMS) brief interview for mental status summary score of 5 out of a possible 15 points. Section M (skin conditions) was coded to indicate the resident did not have any pressure ulcers or wounds to the feet. On 02/05/2021, the facility staff identified a wound to the residents left heel. The resident was seen by a wound physician and this wound was classified as an arterial wound. On 04/13/2021 at 1:42 p.m., the surveyor observed (LPN) licensed practical nurse #1 complete wound care.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2019-04-08 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview and facility policy review it was determined the kitchen staff failed prepare food in a clean and sanitary manner for facility residents. Findings: The facility kitchen staff failed to prepare foods in a clean and sanitary manner. The initial tour of the kitchen environment began 4/7/19 at 8:00 AM. The surveyor entered the second floor dining room. A kitchenette at the rear of the dining section contained a steam table and refrigerator. A kitchen employee was stirring the breakfast foods on the steam table. None of the foods were covered with lids or wrap of any sort. The surveyor asked to see the temperature log on the foods contained in the steam table. The employee did not understand what the surveyor was asking about. When asked if she had obtained the temperatures on the food, the kitchen employee held up her hands and shook her head. She did not understand when the surveyor asked if she had a thermometer to take the food temperatures. At this point, another staff member called down to the kitchen to find someone to take the food…
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 before2019-04-08 · 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 observation, staff interview, and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to follow physician's orders for 1 of 19 Residents in the survey sample, Resident # 14. The findings included: The facility staff failed to ensure that Resident # 14 was wearing physician ordered TED hose. Resident # 14 was an [AGE] year-old- female who was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE], with a readmission date of 3/26/19. Diagnoses included but were not limited to, congestive heart failure, type 2 diabetes mellitus, major depressive disorder, and hyperlipidemia. The clinical record for Resident # 14 was reviewed on 4/7/19 at 2:55 pm. The most recent MDS (minimum data set) assessment was a significant change assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 4/2/19. Section C of the MDS assesses cognitive patterns. In Section C0500, the facility staff documented that Resident # 14 had a BIMS (brief interview for mental status) score of 10 out of 15, which indicated that Resident # 15's cognitive 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 · D2019-04-08 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, and clinical record review, facility staff failed to provide services to prevent urinary tract infections for 1 of 19 Residents in the survey sample, Resident # 52. The findings included: The facility staff failed to ensure that Resident # 52 Foley catheter was secure with a leg strap. Resident # 52 was an [AGE] year-old-female who was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE], with a readmission date of 5/25/17. Diagnoses included but were not limited to, obstructive and reflux uropathy, type 2 diabetes mellitus, dementia with behavioral disturbance, and hypertension. The most recent MDS (minimum data set) assessment for Resident # 52 was an annual assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 3/16/19. Section C of the MDS assesses cognitive patterns. In Section C0500, the facility staff documented that Resident # 52 had a BIMS (brief interview for mental status) score of 5 out of 15, which indicated that Resident # 52's cognitive status was severely impaired.…
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 before2019-04-08 · 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, facility staff failed to securely store medication in 1 of 2 medication rooms. On [DATE], when the surveyors arrived to the facility at 7:45 AM, the door to the medication room behind the nurse's station on [NAME] hall was open. The treatment cart was unlocked. No nursing staff were present in the room or at the nurse's station nearby. Two nurses were working medication carts in the hall and the nursing supervisor was in the dining room. The medication refrigerator was unlocked. There were no controlled substances in the refrigerator. None of the stored medications were expired. The door to the medication room was closed by 8:15 AM. The medication rooms were not observed open and unattended again during the survey. The director of nursing was notified of the concern during a discussion on [DATE] at approximately 3 PM. The director of nursing stated she would address the issue with nursing staff.
- No harm found · C2021-04-15 · tag F0868 — widespreadHave the Quality Assessment and Assurance group have the required members and meet at least quarterly
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on staff interview and facility document review the facility staff failed to provided evidence that the facility QA (quality assurance) committee met at least quarterly for the last 2 quarters of 2020. The findings included: Surveyor reviewed the facility QA program on 04/15/21 at approximately 1:00 pm. The surveyor could not locate evidence that the facility QA committee had met during the last two quarters of 2020 (July-December). Surveyor informed the administrator that the information could not be located. On 04/14/21 at approximately 1:45 pm, the administrator stated the evidence of QA meetings could not be located. The concern of no having evidence of quarterly QA meetings was discussed with the administrator and director of nursing during a meeting on 04/15/21 at approximately 2:00 pm. No further evidence provided prior to exit.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| MCNICHOLS, MARY | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | since 11/26/1988 |
| RAWLINGS, DAVID | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/29/2011 |
| STAPLES, EMILY | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/01/2024 |
| WHITE, DENISE | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/29/2011 |
| CATRAMBONE, JOSEPH | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 12/31/2024 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 12 rows in the source record cover these 5 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.
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.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2024). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in VA
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Virginia Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 495357. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2023-08-25, 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.