Greenspring Village
7470 Spring Village Dr, Springfield, VA 22150 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 62 certified beds · (703) 923-4663 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (33% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Mar 2025
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0605, F0607) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- a high number of inspection citations overall (35) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $81,178 in federal fines (most recent 2025-03-06)
- its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
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 | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's staffing and quality-measure ratings run 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself, and staffing on its payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 2 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 fell from 5 to 1 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 | 15.3% | 14.9% | 15.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 4.9% | 5.4% | 5.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 1.8% | 0.4% | 0.9% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.4% | 1.6% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 1.6% | 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 | 2.7% | 3.6% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 19.8% | 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 | 6.8% | 4.7% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 29.3% | 21.8% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 16.5% | 14.2% | 17.1% | typical |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.4% | 1.3% | 1.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 73.6% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 18.3% | 22.3% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 7.7% | 11.5% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.90 | 1.52 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.70 | 1.48 | 1.80 | typical |
‡ 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.
71.9% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 256 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 56.4% 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 94 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 0.40 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 69% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 7% 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 | 71.9%CMS range 66.1–78.8 | 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 | 9.4%CMS range 7.3–12.4 | 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 | 56.4% | 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 | 63.8% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 58.5% | 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 | 94.1% | 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 | 95.3% | 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 | 0.8% | 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 | 1.7% | 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 | 6.6%CMS range 4.0–9.8 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.87 | 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 62 beds and averages 56.0 residents a day — about 90% 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 5.23 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.85 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.96 is at or above 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 5.09 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.28 on weekdays — 4% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.82 to 0.92 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 33% is below the national median of 45%. 3 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
35 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 24 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · G2025-03-06 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, resident interview, staff interview, clinical record review and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to implement interventions to prevent the development of a pressure ulcer for one resident, Resident #1 (R1) of 33 residents in the survey sample, which resulted in a facility acquired wound that was identified at the advanced stage 3, constituting harm. The findings included: According to the clinical record, R1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses for R1 included but are not limited to muscle weakness, osteoarthritis, venous insufficiency, dementia, and lack of coordination. R1's Significant Change Minimum Data Set (an assessment tool), dated 1/11/2025, coded R1 with severe cognitive impairment, limited range of motion to left side, impaired mobility, and urinary & fecal incontinence. This assessment also coded R1 as dependent for turning & repositioning, while coding that R1 required maximal assistance for transferring. Although this assessment identified…
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 · E2025-03-06 · tag F0574 — patternThe resident has the right to receive notices in a format and a language he or she understands.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on resident interview, staff interview and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to ensure that five residents, (Resident #4 (R4), Resident #8 (R8), Resident #22 (R22), Resident #30 (R30), and Resident #309 (R309)), had the information on how to file a complaint with the state licensure office and state survey agency in a survey sample of 33 residents. The findings included: The facility failed to make sure all residents was aware of how to file a complaint with the state licensure office and state survey agency. On 3/3/25 at 2:00 p.m., a resident council meeting was conducted. The five residents stated that they were not aware of where the postings were located with the information on how to contact the state licensure office and state survey agency if they needed to file a complaint. The surveyor observed the postings on each nursing unit that contained the state licensure office and state survey agency contact information. On 3/4/25 at 5:08 p.m., an end of day meeting was conducted with the administrator, assistant administrator, director of nursing,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-03-06 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — patternHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, resident interviews, staff interviews and facility documentation, the facility staff failed to ensure that five residents,( Resident #4 (R4), Resident #8 (R8), Resident #22 (R22), Resident #30 (R30) and Resident #309 (R309), had the information on how to file a grievance out of a survey of 33 residents. The findings included: The facility staff failed to provide the information to the residents on how to file a grievance, where grievance forms are located, and who the grievance officer was for the healthcare residents on Unit 200 and 300. On 3/3/25 at 2:00 p.m. a resident council meeting was conducted, which was attended by R4, R8, R22, R30, and R309. The five residents stated that they were not aware of what a grievance form was or how to file a grievance. When asked who the grievance officer was, none of the residents able to. The surveyor was able to give a copy of a grievance form to each resident in the meeting and all five of the residents stated that they had never been told about this form. R30 said, We haven't had a social worker since [name redacted]…
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 · E2025-03-06 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — patternDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to implement their abuse policy with regards to the pre-screening of employees for 12 of 25 (Staff C, E, G, H, I, K, M, P, S, U, W, and X) employee/staff records reviewed. The findings included: 1. For Staff U, the facility staff permitted the employee to work 20 months without knowing the status of their criminal background check and if they had been convicted of any barrier crimes. On [DATE], a sample of 25 staff records was selected for review for pre-screening requirements. Staff U's file was provided, which indicated she was a certified nursing assistant (CNA) and was hired [DATE]. The facility provided evidence that a criminal record check was requested on [DATE], but no evidence that the criminal record check was received was provided. On [DATE] at 09:35 a.m., an interview was conducted with the Senior Human Resources manager, (other employee #10- OE #10). OE #10 stated, It is a state regulation for us to pull a criminal…
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 · E2025-03-06 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — patternEnsure 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY 3. For Resident #9 (R9), the facility staff failed to respond to a medication regime review (MRR) and recommendation from the pharmacist in a timely manner and failed to give rationale for the decisions selected. On 3/5/25 at 9 a.m., a clinical record review was conducted of R9's chart. This review revealed one MRR dated 12/20/24. This review noted that R9 was on an opioid Tramadol Hydrochloride in combination with a medication that may increase adverse effects, Quetiapine Fumarate. Recommendation: Please consider avoiding or minimizing concomitant use, perhaps tapering Quetiapine. The physician noted, I decline the recommendation(s) above and do not wish to implement any changes due to the reasons below. Rationale: which was blank and gave no rationale. On 3/5/25, the surveyor requested a copy of R9's MRR's and was provided MRR's dated 11/22/24, 1/23/25, and 2/20/25, which were not in the resident's clinical record. Review of these MRR's revealed that on 11/22/24, the pharmacist noted that R9 had a diagnosis of…
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 · E2025-03-06 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — patternImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY 3. For Resident #9 (R9), who was receiving multiple psychotropic medications, the facility staff failed to perform gradual dose reductions and ensure the resident was free from unnecessary psychotropic medications. On 3/4/25 and 3/5/25, R9 was observed attending group activities and eating meals in the dining room. R9 was noted to be calm, engaged and no behaviors noted. On 3/5/25, a clinical record review was conducted. This review revealed that R9 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] from assisted living, where her spouse was also a resident. R9's diagnosis included, but were not limited to: unspecified dementia, unspecified severity, without behaviors/psych/mood/anxiety; bipolar disorder, unspecified; psychotic disorder with delusions due to known physiological condition; unspecified dementia with behavioral disturbance; major depressive disorder, recurrent, mild; major depressive disorder, single episode, unspecified; dementia in other disorder classified elsewhere, severe, with other behavioral…
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 · E2025-03-06 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview and facility document review, the facility staff failed to prepare food in a sanitary manner in the main kitchen. The findings include: A scoop was observed stored in the bulk flour supply. Stainless serving pans were stored nested and wet. On 3/3/25 at 2:18 p.m., an initial inspection of the kitchen was conducted accompanied by the executive chef (other staff #1), certified dietary manager (other staff #2) and assistant general dietary manager (other staff #3). During this inspection, a scoop was observed stored inside the bulk flour bin, resting in the flour. The executive chef stated at this time that the scoop was not supposed to be positioned in the flour and that the scoop was to be removed from inside the flour bin and cleaned after each use. A rack of ready-to-use serving pans were inspected. Eight large stainless serving pans were nested with water droplets noted along the rims of the pans. The certified dietary manager stated the pans were supposed to be air dried prior to stacking/nesting. A dry rack was observed available for pan…
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 · E2025-03-06 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — patternSet up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interviews and clinical record review, the facility's quality assessment and assurance program failed to implement appropriate plans of action to correct identified quality deficiencies previously cited, having the potential to affect residents on two of the two nursing units. The findings included: The facility's quality assessment and assurance program failed to implement appropriate plans of action to correct quality deficiencies previously identified by the state survey agency and remained out of compliance during a revisit survey. During a survey conducted 3/3/25-3/6/25, the facility was identified and cited for several quality deficiencies which included, development and implementation of comprehensive resident centered care plans, failure to review and revise care plans, timely completion of drug regime reviews, unnecessary psychotropic medications, food storage, and COVID-19 immunizations. Following the survey, the facility submitted an approved plan of corrective action that included they would complete audits to identify other residents affected…
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 · E2025-03-06 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — patternKeep all essential equipment working safely.
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 maintain the walk-in freezer in proper working order. The seal on the freezer door was in disrepair and had been in this condition for over seven months. The findings include: On 3/3/25 at 2:29 p.m., accompanied by the certified dietary manager (other staff #2), assistant general dietary manager (other staff #3) and the executive chef (other staff #1), the walk-in freezer was inspected. There was heavy frozen condensation observed across the ceiling of the freezer. Frozen condensation was observed on the fan grates positioned along the ceiling on the right wall of the freezer. Fine ice shavings were noted in the freezer floor. There was no observed contamination of food/product packaging, and the freezer temperature was acceptable. The certified dietary manager and executive chef were interviewed at this time about the condensation. The certified dietary manager stated there had been an issue with condensation on and off for months and that kitchen staff scraped/removed the condensation…
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 · D2025-03-06 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interview, facility document review, and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to protect a resident's right to be free from physical/verbal abuse by a private duty aide for one of thirty-three residents in the survey sample (Resident #252). The findings include: A clinical record review revealed that Resident #252 (R252) was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included Parkinson's, post hip joint replacement, delusional disorder, anemia, dementia with behavioral disturbance, anxiety, vitamin deficiency and psychotic disorder. The minimum data set (MDS) assesment dated 3/8/23 coded R252 with short and long-term memory problems and severely impaired cognitive skills. A facility reported summary dated 3/15/23 documented that a housekeeper (other staff #15) reported on 3/15/23 at 12:45 p.m. that she witnessed R252's private duty aide (other staff #16) shove him back into his wheelchair and refer to the resident as crazy. The facility's investigation documented that the housekeeper stated she was cleaning R252's room when R252 was observed standing…
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 · D2025-03-06 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — isolatedPrevent the use of unnecessary psychotropic medications or use medications that may restrain a resident's ability to function.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interviews, clinical record review and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to ensure residents were free from unnecessary psychotropic medications and perform gradual dose reductions for one resident, Resident #111 (R111), out of a survey sample of 11 residents. The findings included: A review of R111's clinical record revealed that a gradual dose reduction (GDR) was not completed for one of R111's antidepressant medications. On 5/14/25 at 9:03 a.m., an interview was conducted with a licensed practical nurse, LPN#1. LPN#1 was asked to explain the procedure for pharmacy recommendations. LPN#1 stated that pharmacy recommendations were given to the physician to review. LPN#1 said, Recommendations should be done right away, it needs to be taken care of. LPN#1 stated that the floor nurses and the clinical manager was responsible for notifying the physician of the pharmacy recommendations and making sure the recommendations were addressed. On 5/14/25 at 4:00 p.m., an end of day meeting was conducted with the administrator, director of nursing and 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.
Show the remaining 24 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-03-06 · tag F0623 — isolatedProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview, clinical record review, and facility document review, the facility staff failed to provide written notification of reasons for transfer or discharge to the resident and the resident's representative(s) for one of thirty-three sampled residents, (Resident #20). The findings include: For Resident #20, the facility staff failed to provide the resident and the resident's representative(s) written notice of the reason(s) for transfer/discharge to the hospital on [DATE], 1/21/25, and 2/24/25. Resident #20's diagnosis list indicated diagnoses that included, but were not limited to, Urinary Tract Infection (UTI), Acute Respiratory Failure with Hypoxia, Repeated Falls, Sepsis, Congestive Heart Failure, Chronic Kidney Disease-Stage 3, and Vascular Dementia. The most recent minimum data set (MDS) with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 2/3/25, assigned the resident a brief interview for mental status (BIMS) summary score of 3 out of 15 for cognitive abilities, indicating the resident was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-03-06 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, resident interview, staff interview, clinical record review, and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to develop and implement a timely and adequate baseline care plan for one resident (Resident #49) in a survey sample of 33 residents, that includes the instructions needed to provide effective and person-centered care. On 3/4/25 at 9:50 am, Resident #49 (R49) was observed sitting in a wheelchair beside his bed, wearing a large black molded plastic boot that encased his left foot, from the toes to just below the knee. Also present was R49's significant other/POA. When asked about care satisfaction, R49 nodded his head and looked at his significant other who replied, Yes, I believe that they do a good job here, much better than where he's been before . but I know one thing that they could do better. They really need to make sure everyone knows how to fasten his boot properly. The staff mean well, but they really [NAME] those straps. Everyone does it differently. Even PT…
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 · D2025-03-06 · 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 observations, resident interview, staff interview, clinical record review, and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to develop and implement an accurate comprehensive person-centered care plan for one resident (Resident R49) in a survey sample of 33 residents, that included measurable objectives and timeframes. On 3/4/25 at 9:50 am, resident was observed sitting in a wheelchair beside his bed, wearing a large black molded plastic boot that encased his left foot, from the toes to just below the knee. Also present was R49's significant other/POA. When asked about care satisfaction, R49 nodded his head and looked at his significant other who replied, Yes, I believe that they do a good job here, much better than where he's been before . but I know one thing that they could do better. They really need to make sure everyone knows how to fasten his boot properly. The staff mean well, but they really [NAME] those straps. Everyone does it differently. Even PT has exclaimed at finding the boot…
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 before2025-03-06 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, resident interview, staff interview, clinical record review, and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to review and revise the care plan for three residents (Resident #5- R5, Resident #39-R39, and Resident #49-R49), in a survey sample of 33 residents. The findings included: 1. For R5, who was non-verbal and totally dependent upon facility staff for all activities of daily living, the facility staff failed to review and revise the care plan to accurately reflect the resident's needs for activity programing. On 3/3/25 in the afternoon, on 3/4/25 at 2:55 p.m., and 3/5/25 at 2:32 p.m., R5 was visited in her room. R5 was laying in her bed each of the days, was noted to be non-verbal, and didn't respond when spoken to. There was a sign in the room that indicated Keep the tv on channel 133 EWTN Religious channel. On 3/3/25 and 3/4/25, R5 was in bed without the tv on, no radio was on, and no indication of social, auditory, visual, or other sensory stimulation was observed. On…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-03-06 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on resident interview, staff interview, clinical record review and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to follow professional standards of nursing practice for one resident, Resident #104 (R104), out of a survey sample of 11 residents. The findings included: The staff failed to notify the physician when a medication was not available. On 5/13/25 at 2:30 p.m., an interview was conducted with R104. During the tour of the nursing unit, R104 was interviewed by request. R104 stated that she was prescribed a prn (as needed) cough medicine that she could have every six hours if needed. R104 said, I got a dose of the cough medicine during the night but when I asked for a dose this morning, I was told by the nurse there was no more here; it would need to be ordered. R104 stated she asked the nurse to check in the stat (immediate) box and R104 said, The nurse was not even aware of a stat box where you can get medications from if needed. Reportedly, R104 was told that the medication was supposed to be here by 8:00 a.m., and then the time was changed to arrive at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-03-06 · 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 resident interviews, staff interviews, clinical record review and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to assess resident, communicate with the provider, and ensure quality of care for one resident, R#104 (R104), out of a survey sample of 11 residents. The findings included: The staff failed to assess R104 prior to being sent out to the emergency room, failed to communicate with the physician before 911 was called by R104, and failed to review the emergency room report for new orders. On 5/13/25 at 2:30 p.m., R104 stated that she had called her pulmonologist (lung specialist) and said, My pulmonologist wants me to go out to the emergency room to get a CT scan and be treated for my cough, since the facility cannot treat me. R104 stated that she had called her pulmonologist and was waiting to be dressed and then she was calling 911 (emergency number) herself. The resident stated that her vital signs were not being checked, and no one had listened to her lung sounds. R104 said, When my oxygen levels are checked, I have to ask for it to be done. On 5/13/25…
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 · D2025-03-06 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interviews, clinical record review and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to implement interventions to prevent accidents from falls for one resident, Resident #106 (R106) out of a survey of 11 residents. The findings included: On 5/14/25 at 8:30 AM, a clinical record review was conducted, which included the comprehensive care plan. The review revealed that R106 had a fall on 4/29/25, while trying to transfer from wheelchair to bed without assistance. The staff documented a care plan intervention that he was reeducated and was to call for assistance. The record documented another fall on 5/6/25, while he was trying to transfer from the wheelchair to the bed without assistance. The staff again documented that R106 was reeducated on using the call light and to follow him to assist with his needs. The interventions that staff wrote for these falls were interventions that were already in place from previous falls. There was no other entries to indicate that R106 had new interventions put in place to effectively address the required fall prevention,…
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 · D2025-03-06 · 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 observation, resident and family interview, facility staff interview, clinical record review, and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to implement nutritional interventions to maintain the resident's nutritional status and weight, for one resident (Resident #101- R101) in a survey sample of eleven residents. The findings included: For R101, who had experienced a significant weight loss, the facility staff failed to provide the resident with nutritional interventions identified/implemented to prevent further weight loss. On 5/13/25, a clinical record review was conducted of R101's chart, to include the current care plan, which was kept in the resident's room. According to the care plan, R101 was noted in the nutritional care plan to have interventions of .super soup in a mug at lunch/dinner, and super mashed potatoes at lunch/dinner. Offer magic cup at dinner . According to the weights recorded in R101's chart, on 3/5/25, R101 weighed 146.90 lbs. R101 gained weight and on 3/19/25 had a weight of 154 lbs. On 4/2/25, R101's weight was noted to have been…
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 · D2025-03-06 · tag F0744 — failed to care for residents with dementia — isolatedProvide the appropriate treatment and services to a resident who displays or is diagnosed with dementia.
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 documentation review, the facility staff failed to ensure appropriate dementia care was in place for one resident (Resident #9-R9), in a survey sample of 33 residents. The findings included: For R9, who had dementia, the facility staff failed to develop resident specific interventions and identify target behaviors to ensure the resident received appropriate treatment to maintain the resident's highest practicable well-being. On 3/4/25 and 3/5/25, R9 was observed attending group activities and eating meals in the dining room. R9 was noted to be calm, engaged and no behaviors noted. On 3/5/25, a clinical record review was conducted. This review revealed that R9 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] from assisted living, where her spouse was also a resident. R9's diagnosis included, but were not limited to unspecified dementia, unspecified severity, without behaviors/psych/mood/anxiety; unspecified dementia with behavioral disturbance; and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-03-06 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on resident interviews, staff interviews, clinical record review and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to ensure medication was available for one resident, Resident #104 (R104) out of a survey of 11 residents. The findings included The staff failed to keep cough medication in stock to be available for the residents. On 5/13/25 at 2:30 p.m., an interview was conducted with R104. During the tour of the nursing unit R104 was interviewed by request. R104 stated that she was prescribed a prn (as needed) cough medicine that she could have every six hours if needed. R104 said, I got a dose of the cough medicine during the night but when I asked for a dose this morning, I was told by the nurse there was no more here it would need to be ordered. R104 stated she asked the nurse to check in the stat (immediate) box and R104 said, The nurse was not even aware of a stat box where you can get medications from if needed. R104 stated that she was told that the medication was supposed to be here by 8:00 a.m., and then the time was changed to arrive at noon. R104 said,…
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 · D2025-03-06 · 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 and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than 5 percent. There were three errors in 29 opportunities resulting in a medication error rate of 10.3%. The findings include: 1. Resident #33 (R33) was administered a dose of extended-release morphine when the physician's order required immediate release. A medication pass observation was conducted on 3/4/25 at 8:09 a.m. with licensed practical nurse (LPN) #1 administering medications to R33. Included in the medications administered to R33 was morphine 15 mg (milligrams) extended-release. R33's clinical record documented a physician's order dated 2/2/25 for morphine 15 mg immediate release tablets two times per day for pain management. On 3/4/25 at 9:00 a.m., LPN #1 was interviewed about the morphine administered to R33. LPN #1 reviewed R33's clinical record and stated the current morphine order listed immediate release and not extended-release. LPN #1 reviewed R33's medication supply from the locked storage and stated the medication she gave was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-03-06 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview, clinical record review, and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to maintain a complete and accurate clinical record for two residents (Resident #108 and Resident #101), in a survey sample of 11 residents. The findings included: 1. For Resident #108 (R108) the facility medical provider failed to complete and accurately document in the clinical record the resident's CPR (Cardiopulmonary resuscitation) wishes and left the information blank. On [DATE], a clinical record review was conducted of R108's chart. This review revealed that R108 signed and executed a durable do not resuscitate (DNR) on [DATE]. On [DATE] the medical provider/doctor completed a Code Status Discussion form and indicated that R108's wishes were for Code B, DNR, but hospitalize. On [DATE], the doctor initiated a National POLST Form: A Portable Medical Order. The POLST form had R108's name, date of birth , gender, R108's signature and the signature of the doctor. Sections A-D, where R108's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-03-06 · 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
2. During medication administration, the nurse (licensed practical nurse #4- LPN #4) failed to follow standard infection control practices by not wearing gloves, touching multiple surfaces with contaminated the gloves, and then directly handling the medications with contaminated gloves. On 5/14/25 at 8:31 a.m., LPN #4 was observed to prepare and administer medications to a resident on the 200 unit. LPN #4 donned gloves and with her gloved hands took a set of keys from her pocket, opened the medication cabinet located in the resident's room, removed the medication package cards, and returned to the medication cart, touching the medication cart, computer, computer mouse, etc. LPN #4 was then observed removing/popping medications from the package cards directly into her gloved hands and then placed the pills into a medication cup, which were then administered to the resident. Following the above observations of LPN #4 preparing and administering the above medications, the surveyor asked LPN #4 about wearing gloves during medication administration. LPN #4 stated that she usually wears…
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 · D2025-03-06 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
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 offer a pneumococcal vaccine in accordance with nationally recognized standards for (1) one of (5) five sampled residents reviewed for immunizations (Resident #1). The findings included: For Resident #1, the facility staff failed to offer the resident a pneumococcal conjugate vaccine 20 (PCV20) or a pneumococcal conjugate vaccine 21 (PCV21) at least one year after the pneumococcal conjugate vaccine 13 (PCV13) was administered. Resident #1's diagnosis list indicated diagnoses, which included, but not limited to Muscle Weakness, Dementia, Hypertensive Heart Disease, Anxiety Disorder, Occlusion and Stenosis of Bilateral Carotid Arteries, and Chronic Kidney Disease-Stage 2. The most recent minimum data set (MDS) with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 1/11/25, assigned the resident a brief interview for mental status (BIMS) summary score of 4 out of 15 for cognitive abilities, indicating the resident was severely impaired in cognition. Resident #1 was over the age of 65 years…
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 · D2025-03-06 · tag F0887 — isolatedEducate residents and staff on COVID-19 vaccination, offer the COVID-19 vaccine to eligible residents and staff after education, and properly document each resident and staff member's vaccination status.
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 offer updated COVID-19 vaccines for (1) one of (5) five sampled residents reviewed for immunizations (Resident #15). The findings included: For Resident #15, the facility staff failed to offer the resident an updated 2023-2024 formula COVID-19 vaccine and an updated 2024-2025 formula COVID-19 vaccine. Resident #15's diagnosis list indicated diagnoses, which included, but not limited to Parkinson's Disease with Dyskinesia with Fluctuations, Muscle Weakness, Repeated Falls, Cognitive Communication Deficit, Glaucoma, Hypertension, Diabetes Mellitus-Type 2, Dementia, and Atrial Fibrillation. The most recent minimum data set (MDS) with an assessment reference date (ARD) of 2/10/25 assigned the resident a brief interview for mental status (BIMS) summary score of 9 out of 15 for cognitive abilities indicating the resident was moderately impaired in cognition. A review of Resident #15's COVID-19 vaccination record revealed resident received a COVID-19 vaccination on 10/7/22. Surveyor…
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 · D2021-10-06 · tag F0645 — isolatedPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to ensure a Level I PASRR (preadmission screening and resident review) was completed prior to admission for one of 23 residents, Resident #50. Findings include: Resident #50 was admitted to the facility originally on 09/04/21. Diagnoses for Resident #50 included, but were not limited to, diverticulitis, major depression and bipolar disorder. The most recent MDS [minimum data set] was an admission assessment dated [DATE]. This MDS assessed Resident #50 with a cognitive score of 8, indicating the resident had moderate impairment in daily decision making skills. In Section A1510. Level II Preadmission Screening and Resident Review the section was blank; none had been marked. In Section I. Active Diagnoses, Resident #50 was assessed as having depression and bipolar disorder. The resident's clinical records were reviewed. Resident #50 had an active diagnosis of depression and bipolar disorder. The resident's physician's orders were then…
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 before2021-10-06 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interview, and clinical record review, the facility failed to review and revise a care plan regarding safety/wandering for for one of 23 residents in the survey sample, Resident #19. The Findings Include: Resident #19 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses for Resident #19 included; Respiratory failure, and muscle weakness, and chronic kidney disease. The most current MDS (minimum data set) was a quarterly assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 7/31/21. Resident #19 was assessed with long and short-term memory problems and severely cognitively impaired. On 10/6/21 Resident #19's current MDS Section E. behaviors, documented a behavior of wandering occurring 4 to 6 days during the MDS look back period. Resident #19's current care plan for Safety and Exploring was then reviewed and documented no wandering throughout the house or community. On 10/06/21 at 2:22 PM, the social worker (other staff, OS #1) was interviewed. OS #1 agreed that she had completed section E of the MDS…
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 before2021-10-06 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review and staff interview, the facility staff failed to follow physician's orders for bladder scan monitoring and fluid intake for one of 23 residents in the survey sample, Resident #26. Findings include: Resident # 26 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses for Resident #26 included, but were not limited to: atrial fibrillation, coronary artery disease, diabetes mellitus, history of UTI (urinary tract infection) with an indwelling urinary catheter. The most recent MDS (minimum data set) was an admission assessment dated [DATE]. This MDS assessed the resident as having a cognitive score of 3, indicating the resident had severe impairment in daily decision making skills. The resident was also assessed in Section H. H0100. Appliances, as having an indwelling catheter. During Resident #26's clinical record review, the resident's physician's orders were reviewed. A physician's order dated 08/23/21 at 8:00 AM documented, .Remove Foley catheter on 08/23/21 at 8 AM .Bladder scan…
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 before2021-10-06 · 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
Based on observation, staff interview, and facility document review, the facility staff failed to ensure expired medications were not readily available for distribution on one of 3 units, the 200 unit. The findings include: On 10/6/2021 at 8:15 a.m., medication storage observations were conducted on the 200 unit with Registered Nurse (RN #1). Observed on the 200 unit medication cart, was an opened bottle of Robafen liquid (cough syrup). The opened date on the bottle was 11/19/19 with an expiration date of 7/21. Also on the cart were 3 opened insulin vials. The label indicated an opened date and expiration date of 28 days after opening and were as follows: Humalog opened 4/28/21, Humalog opened 5/23/21, and Lantus opened 7/28/21. On 10/06/2021 at 8:20 a.m., RN #1 was interviewed regarding expired medication. RN #1 said, all of the nurses are responsible for checking for expired medications daily and these medication shouldn't be on the cart. On 10/6/21 at 10:50 a.m., the director of nursing (DON) was informed of the above findings. The DON stated expired medications should not be…
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 · E2019-09-25 · tag F0700 — patternTry different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
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, clinical record review, and facility document review the facility staff failed to assess seven of twenty residents for bed rail safety (Residents # 12, 16, 48, 39, 65, 66, and 42). Findings include: 1. Resident # 12 was initially admitted to the facility 8/4/14 with a readmission date of 9/8/16. Diagnoses for Resident # 12 included, but were not limited to: high blood pressure, vascular dementia, depression, muscle weakness, repeated falls, and unsteadiness of feet. The most recent MDS (minimum data set) was an annual review dated 9/1/19 and had the resident scored with severe cognitive impairment with a total summary score of 01 out of 15. On 9/24/19 at approximately 4:00 p.m. Resident # 12's room was observed. The door was partially closed. Moaning was heard coming from the room. Resident #12 was observed with her knees on the fall mat, her upper body across the bed, and her arms entangled in the grab rail. LPN (licensed practical nurse) #2 was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2019-09-25 · tag F0909 — failed to maintain a comfortable temperature — patternRegularly inspect all bed frames, mattresses, and bed rails (if any) for safety; and all bed rails and mattresses must attach safely to the bed frame.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interview, and facility document review, the facility staff failed to ensure regular bed inspection of bed frames, mattresses and bed rails for 7 of 79 beds currently with bed rails in use during the survey (Residents # 12, 16, 48, 39, 65, 66, and 42). Findings include: On 9/25/19 at 8:30 a.m. the maintenance staff, identified as OS (other staff) # 4 was interviewed about the bed rail program, and asked if there was any documentation of bed measurements to ensure residents were not at risk for entrapment. OS # 4 stated It's been over a year since we were told not to install bed rails. We are not involved. Anyone with a bed rail still on the bed probably had it prior to us no longer doing it. OS # 4 was asked if there were changes in the resident's weight, or a different mattress was applied to the bed, who would ensure the bed was free from an entrapment risk. OS # 4 stated Any changes like that the floor nurse/nurse manager is responsible to check. On 9/25/19 at 9:52 a.m. the administrator, assistant administrator, and RN # 2 were interviewed about the bed rail…
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 before2019-09-25 · tag F0623 — isolatedProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review and staff interview, the facility failed, for one of 18 residents in the survey sample, to notify the local Ombudsman of a resident's transfer to the hospital. The findings were: Resident # 2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and most recently readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included anemia, renal insufficiency, hypothyroidism, Non-Alzheimer's dementia, Parkinson's disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and history of malignant neoplasm of the prostate. According to the most recent Minimum Data Set, a Significant Change with an Assessment Reference Date of 9/1/19, the resident was assessed under Section C (Cognitive Patterns) as having short and long term memory problems with severely impaired daily decision making skills. Review of the Nurses Notes in the resident's Electronic Health Record revealed the following entry: 6/17/19 - 4:10 p.m. - Resident is alert and oriented to self, observed with confusion and forgetfulness, cognition is not within his usual…
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 before2019-09-25 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, staff interview, and clinical record review, facility staff failed to review and revise comprehensive care plans (CCP) for two of 20 residents in the survey sample, Residents #42 and #39. Neither resident's care plans were reviewed by a complete interdisciplinary team (IDT). Resident #42's care plan did not include fall interventions, or use of siderails. Resident #39's care plan did not include interventions for weight loss. Findings included: 1. Resident #42 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including, but not limited to: multiple pelvic fractures, osteoporosis, dementia and depression. The most recent MDS (minimum data set) was a quarterly assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 08/05/2019. Resident #42 was assessed as moderately impaired in her cognitive status with a total cognitive score of nine (09) out of 15. Progress notes reviewed on 09/24/2019 at 10:15 a.m. included documentation of falls on 05/30/19, 08/28/19, and 09/23/19. Subsequent review of…
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 before2019-09-25 · 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
Based on observation, facility document review and staff interview, the facility staff failed to ensure expired medications and biologicals were not available for use in one of two medications rooms (Evergreen 2nd floor). The findings include: On 9/24/19 at 1:25 p.m., accompanied by licensed practical nurse (LPN #1), the medication room on the Evergreen second floor unit was inspected. A bottle of Lidocaine viscous medication labeled as expired on 9/13/19 was stored in the medication refrigerator. Also stored in the medication room were three expired vacutainer blood collection tubes. One tube had a manufacturer's expiration date of 1/31/19. Two additional tubes had expiration dates of 7/31/19. LPN #1 was interviewed at the time of this observation about the expired medication and collection tubes. LPN #1 stated the Lidocaine viscous was for a current resident and should have been discarded. LPN #1 stated the blood collection tubes were used by nursing for stat emergency labs. LPN #1 stated all nurses were responsible for monitoring the drug storage room and discarding expired…
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
$81,178 in federal fines across 1 penalty. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.
- $81,178 — penalty dated 2025-03-06
- Medicare payment denial — starting 2025-06-06 for 23 days
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to ERICKSON SENIOR LIVING — 17 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 | 1 of 5 | 4.2 | -3.2 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 1 of 5 | 3.6 | -2.6 vs chain |
| Staffing | 4 of 5 | 4.8 | -0.8 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 4.1 | ≈ chain avg |
The other 16 homes this chain runs (chain average 4.2★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NATIONAL SENIOR COMMUNITIES, INC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | 100% | since 01/14/2021 |
| BROWN, IAN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 04/01/2023 |
| BROWN, PATRICIA | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 04/01/2022 |
| CLUPPER, KATHERINE | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 04/01/2024 |
| COLINS, MARY | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 04/01/2018 |
| ERSTAD, EILEEN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 02/15/2007 |
| JACQUE, ZINA | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 04/01/2018 |
| LEONARD, MONTY | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 04/01/2022 |
| MOSCATO, MARY | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 04/01/2024 |
| PAULK, PAMELA | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 04/01/2022 |
| POMERANZ, WILLIAM | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 04/01/2025 |
| REEL, STEPHANIE | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 04/22/2013 |
| ROSKIEWICZ, MICHAEL | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 04/01/2019 |
| SHARP, RUSSEL | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 04/01/2023 |
| WALLICK, DANIEL | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 04/01/2025 |
| EMBLEY, MARK | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/27/2021 |
| GANTERT, NEAL | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/01/2018 |
| HALL, JOHN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/30/2010 |
| SAWICKI, SCOTT | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 04/01/2024 |
| STINER, PAMELA | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/01/2024 |
| TYLER, DANIEL | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 04/01/2025 |
| ERICKSON SENIOR LIVING LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/13/2025 |
| BUTLER, RICHARD | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 01/01/2014 |
| DAR, RIZWAN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/13/2025 |
| SWEETSER, CHRISTIAN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/01/2022 |
| WILSON, PANDORA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/22/2025 |
| BISON, MICHAEL | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/09/2025 |
| RIDLEY, FRED | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/09/2025 |
| SONES, RANDALL | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/09/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 47 rows in the source record cover these 29 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
2 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $10.2M paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
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 495354. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-03-06, 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.