Elkins Rehabilitation & Care Center
2533 Beverly Pike, Elkins, WV 26241 · Non profit - Corporation · 111 certified beds · (304) 636-1391 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Mar 2026
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607, F0609, F0610) — 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 (34) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $8,278 in federal fines (most recent 2025-08-28)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
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 | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 5 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 2 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 2 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 1 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 3 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 2 to 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 17.1% | 14.7% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 8.8% | 6.3% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.2% | 0.4% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 3.5% | 1.6% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 7.6% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.2% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 4.0% | 4.4% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 24.1% | 15.9% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 23.4% | 27.0% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 98.0% | 97.6% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 2.0% | 4.2% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 26.2% | 22.1% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 32.6% | 13.4% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 2.6% | 1.0% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 92.1% | 79.4% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 22.5% | 22.5% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 18.7% | 11.3% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 3.11 | 1.80 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 3.76 | 1.84 | 1.80 | worse |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ 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.
53.3% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 111 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 63.3% 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 49 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 0.42 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 72% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 8% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 53.3%CMS range 45.8–61.7 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.0%CMS range 6.0–15.3 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 63.3% | 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 | 57.1% | 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 | 59.2% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 96.9% | 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 | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 1.6% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 3.1% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.1%CMS range 3.9–11.1 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.97 | 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 111 beds and averages 103.5 residents a day — about 93% occupied, or roughly 8 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 4.24 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.76 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.34 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.58 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.51 on weekdays — 21% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.85 to 0.54 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 36% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
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.
34 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 23 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2025-08-28 · 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 record review and staff interview the facility failed to provide care and services in accordance with current standards of practice by administering Resident #115 a Benzodiazepines that she was not ordered. The State Agency (SA) confirmed that this failed practice caused harm to Resident #115. After Resident was given the Benzodiazepines she fell, resulting in a sprained hip. The incident occurred on 07/06/24 and was corrected on 07/08/24, therefore it is cited at past non-compliance.In a addition the facility failed to ensure it followed its policy and procedure for Resident #45 on weight management. This failed practice was found true for (2) of (27) residents investigated for quality of care during the Long-Term Care Survey Process. Resident identifiers #115 and #45. Facility Census #103.Findings Include: a) Resident #115A review 0N 08/27/25 at 1:40 PM of an Facility Reported Incident dated 07/08/25, revealed a description of an incident that is summarized as follows: On 07/06/25 at approximately 11:00 AM, Nurse administered narcotic without a physician's order to…
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 · D2026-03-11 · 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 and facility documentation, the facility failed to ensure that a resident residing on the facility's Alzheimer's unit was free from physical abuse, as described by nurse aide (NA) staff members who witnessed the incident. Using the reasonable person concept it can be determined that the average person would have experienced psycho-social harm as a result of the physical abuse, since an average person would not expect to be smacked in his/her own home or in a healthcare facility. This had the potential to affect a limited number of residents. Resident Identifier: Resident #1. Facility census 104.The facility's Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation policy, with a revision date of 06/23/25, outlined the following:--Identifying, correcting and intervening in situations in which abuse, neglect, exploitation, and misappropriation of resident property is more likely to occur with deployment of trained and qualified staff on each shift in significant numbers to meet the needs of the residents, and ensure that the staff assigned have knowledge of the individual residents care…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-11 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop 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
Based on observation, staff interview, electronic medical record review, and review of the facility's Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation policy, the facility failed to correctly implement their policy for a substantiated allegation of abuse. The facility failed to provide training to staff as per their five-day follow-up of an abuse investigation. Additionally, the facility failed to report a licensed staff member to his/her licensing board. This was true of one (1) of four (4) residents reviewed for abuse during a complaint survey. Resident identifier #1. Census 104.The facility's Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation policy, with a revision date of 06/23/25, outlined the following:--Identifying, correcting and intervening in situations in which abuse, neglect, exploitation, and misappropriation of resident property is more likely to occur with deployment of trained and qualified staff on each shift in significant numbers to meet the needs of the residents, and ensure that the staff assigned have knowledge of the individual residents care needs and behavioral symptoms. --Room or staffing changes,…
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 before2026-03-11 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, electronic medical record review, and review of the facility's Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation policy, the facility failed to take appropriate corrective action, as a result of investigation findings which substantiated physical abuse of a resident. The facility failed to provide additional training to staff as per their five-day follow-up of an abuse investigation. Additionally, the facility failed to report a licensed staff member to his/her licensing board. This was true of one (1) of four (4) residents reviewed for abuse during a complaint survey. Resident identifier #1. Census 104.The facility's Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation policy, with a revision date of 06/23/25, outlined the following:--Identifying, correcting and intervening in situations in which abuse, neglect, exploitation, and misappropriation of resident property is more likely to occur with deployment of trained and qualified staff on each shift in significant numbers to meet the needs of the residents, and ensure that the staff assigned have knowledge of the individual residents…
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 · E2025-08-28 · 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 staff and resident interviews, and observation The Facility failed to ensure residents knew they had the right to file grievances anonymously. This deficient practice had the potential to affect more than a limited number of residents. Facility Census 103: Findings included: a) During observation and resident interview on 08/25/25 at approximately 2:40 PM Resident #88 stated she did not know how to file a grievance anonymously, that she would just talk to the social worker if she had any complaints. In an interview with Resident #41 On 08/25/25 at 2:55 PM, the resident stated she did not know how to file a grievance/complaint anonymously but stated she would just talk to staff.Review of Section C of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS), revealed Residents #88 and #41 had capacity and were cognitively intact. A review of the facilities Grievance policy and Procedure revealed the residents have the right to file grievances without discrimination or reprisal. The policy stated the facility would notify residents individually and through postings on the right to file…
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 before2025-08-28 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and staff interview the facility failed to ensure the resident environment over which it had control was as free from accident hazards as possible. This failed practice was a random opportunity for discovery.Resident identifiers: #51, #63 and #100. Facility Census: 101. a) Residents #51 and #63 On August 25, 2025, at 12:20 PM, the bathroom of Residents #51 and #63 was observed to have a very wet and slippery tile floor with standing water puddles around the toilet base. In an interview with Employee #55, she acknowledged the water puddles and slippery floor and stated she would report it to maintenance. In an interview with Maintenance #175 on 08/25/25, at 12:45 PM, he stated he had discovered the shower faucet was not completely turned off, which caused the standing water and slippery floor tiles in Residents #51 and #63's bathroom. b) Resident #101 On 08/25/25, at 3:46 PM, upon entering Resident #101's room, it was observed that she had a large pair of pink nail clippers in her hand with nail clippings in her lap. On 08/25/25, at 3:50 PM, in an interview…
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 before2025-08-28 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation and staff interview, the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide sanitary environment to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections with regards to the personal care equipment for two (2) residents. This failed practice was a random opportunity of discovery. Resident identifiers # 66 and #9. Facility census: 101. a) Resident # 66During facility entrance observation and interview on 08/25/25 at 3:40 PM, holes and exposed padding were observed on both Resident #66's wheelchair back rest and walker belt strap. b) Resident # 9In an interview with resident # 9 on 08/26/25 at 9:05AM, it was observed that her scooter chair had rips and tears on the right side back rest exposing the inner padding. During a facility walk through with the Infection preventionist on 08/27/25 at 9:35 AM she acknowledged both Resident #9's wheelchair and walker and Resident # 66's scooter chair had exposed inner padding. She stated they would be removed and repaired.
- Potential for harm · E2023-10-25 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — patternDevelop 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
Based on observation, record review and staff interview the facility failed to implement a resident's comprehensive person-centered care plan. This was discovered for one (1) of 28 care plans reviewed during the Long-Term Care Survey Process in the areas of hospice scheduling, application and removal of a hand splint and nutritional interventions for weight loss. Resident Identifiers: #17, #23, #89, #49 and #91. Facility Census: #103 Findings Included: a) Resident #17 On 10/24/23 a record review found Resident #17 has hospice services through (name of Hospice organization) Hospice. On 10/25/23 at 9:00 AM record review found the care plan for Hospice services states the Hospice nurse is to visit two (2) times weekly and as needed. There is no care plan in place for the number of Aide visits. The care plan is to state scheduled days the nurse and aide is to provide services. Review of the aide visit notes from 09/19/23 through 10/17/23 shows the aide is coming randomly on various days of the week. Aide visit records show a visit on 09/19/23 and not again until 09/29/23. No Aide visit…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-10-25 · tag F0849 — patternArrange for the provision of hospice services or assist the resident in transferring to a facility that will arrange for the provision of hospice services.
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 medical record reviews and staff interviews, the facility failed to collaborate with hospice services to develop coordinated care plans for four (4) of four (4) residents reviewed for the care area of hospice during the Long-Term Care Survey Process. The care plans for Resident #18, #17, #23, and #89 did not specify when and what services were to be provided by the hospice staff. Resident identifiers: #18, #17, #23, and #89. Facility census: 103. Findings included: a) Resident #18 A medical record review on 10/25/23 revealed the person-centered care plan for Resident #18 was not developed to collaborate hospice services with the facility. In an interview with the Director of Nursing on 10/25/23 at 1:50 PM, she verified the care plan did not specify when and what hospice services were to be provided. b) Resdient #17 On 10/25/23 at 9:00 AM, a record review found the care plan for Hospice services states the Hospice nurse is to visit two times weekly and as needed. There is no care plan in place for Aide…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-10-25 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and staff interview, the facility failed to establish and maintain an effective infection prevention and control program. Staff failed to remove gloves after incontinence care contaminating the residents bed and surrounding areas. A bedpan and two triangle graduate cylinders were noted hanging on the commode with the toilet seat lifted. This is true for one of one reviewed for wound care and a random opportunity for discovery. Resident identifiers: #69, #94 and #39. Facility census: 103. Findings included: 1. Resident (R) #69 Incontinence care On 10/25/23 at 8:50 AM, Nurse Practitioner (NP) #32 and Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #74 were observed performing incontinence care after completing wound care on R #69. NP #32 wiped the stool off of R #69's behind and placed a new pad under the resident with the assistance of LPN #74. Without removing her soiled gloves, NP #32 assisted with repositioning the resident, pulled the sheet and blanket up to R #69's chin, and touched the upper bed rail. NP #32 removed one glove and carried the trash to the bathroom. NP #32…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-10-25 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — patternImplement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on policy review, record review and staff interview, the facility failed to develop, promote, and implement a facility-wide system to monitor the use of antibiotics. This was true for two (2) out of three (3) residents reviewed for antibiotic use during the Long-Term Care Survey Process. Resident identifiers: #47 and #204. Facility census: 103. Findings included: a) Antibiotic Stewardship Program Policy, revised on 02/25/22 Review of the facility's Antibiotic Stewardship Program policy, completed on 10/25/23 at 9:15 AM, revealed: -The purpose of the program is to optimize the treatment of infections while reducing the adverse events associated with antibiotic use. -The program includes antibiotic use protocols and a system to monitor antibiotic use. -The facility uses the McGeer Criteria to define infections. -Attending physicians prescribe appropriate antibiotics in accordance with standards of practice and facility protocols. b) Resident #47 A record review, completed on 10/25/23 at 9:35 AM, revealed the following physician orders: -Amoxicillin-Pot Clavulanate Oral Tablet…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 23 citations
- Potential for harm · D2023-10-25 · tag F0557 — isolatedHonor the resident's right to be treated with respect and dignity and to retain and use personal possessions.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and staff interview, the facility failed to provide care and treatment in a dignified manner. Staff signed and dated a dressing after it was affixed to Resident #69's body. This is true for one (1) of one (1) reviewed for wound care. Resident identifier: # 69. Facility census: 103. Findings included: a) Resident #69 On 10/25/23 at 8:50 AM Nurse Practitioner (NP) #32 was observed performing wound care and a dressing change on Resident (R) #69's buttocks. After cleaning the wounds, NP #32 applied two clean dressings onto R #69's buttocks. NP #32 signed and dated both dressings after they were affixed to the resident's body. An interview was conducted immediately after this observation with the wound care team: NP #32, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #74 and LPN #124. All three nurses reported they were unaware they should not sign and date a dressing after it is applied to a resident's body. During an interview on 10/25/23 at 9:00 AM the Director of Nursing (DON) agreed staff writing on a dressing after it is affixed to the resident's body is a dignity concern. The…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-10-25 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on medical record review and staff interview the facility failed to notify the physician and resident representative of a change in condition. This was discovered for one (1) of three (3) residents reviewed for the care area of nutrition during the Long-Term Care Survey Process. Resident # 91 had a significant weight loss and the physician and resident representative was not notified. Resident identifier: #91 Facility census: 103 Finding included: a) Resident #91 A medical record review on 10/25/23 for Resident #91 indicated there was a significant weight loss. On 07/04/23 the resident's weight was 137 pounds and on 08/13/23 her weight was 115 pounds. This was calculated at a 16 percent weight loss of 22 pounds. There was no evidence the physician or the resident representative was notified regarding the change in condition. In an interview with the Nursing Home Administrator and the Director of Nursing on 10/25/23 at 9:40 AM, both verified the physician and the Resident Representative had not been notified of the significant weight loss for Resident #91.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-10-25 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to follow Physicians order for medication administration and failed to have an order for pressure ulcer care. Resident Identifiers: #17 and #12. Facility Census: #103 Findings included: a) Resident #17 On 10/24/23 at 10:22 AM record review of Resident #17's care plan found she had a stage IV pressure injury to her sacrum. Review of her current orders found no Physicians order for pressure ulcer treatment. During an interview on 10/25/23 at 10:00 AM Licensed Practical Nurse Wound Nurse Assistant #124 confirmed Resident #17 did have an open, stage IV pressure injury to her sacrum. She stated the wound care team failed to reassess a treatment order that was limited to fifteen (15) days for the pressure injury treatment. Wound care was provided on 10/18/23 and then the order fell off the Treatment Administration Record (TAR) due to the fifteen (15) day restriction on the antibiotic order. Therefore the pressure injury wound has not been treated for the last six (6) days. This was confirmed by documentation on the TAR for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-10-25 · tag F0685 — isolatedAssist a resident in gaining access to vision and hearing services.
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 resident interview, record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to assist a resident in locating his lost hearing aide This was true for one (1) out of ( 2) residents reviewed for communication. Resident identifier #90. Facility census: 103. Findings included: a) Resident #90 During an initial interview on 10/23/23 at 11:15 AM, Resident #90 stated, Can you speak up, I can't hear without my hearing aide. Surveyor observed a hearing aide in Resident #90's left ear. Resident #90 stated, I am supposed to have hearing aides in both of my ears, they lost one of them. I haven't had it for a long time. When asked if he had reported it to anyone? Resident #90 stated, I have told all kinds of people I am not sure who they was. Resident #90 has a BIMS of 14 indicating he is cognitively intact. A record review on 10/24/23 at 9:00 AM, found on Resident #90's admission Nursing assessment dated [DATE] the resident was admitted with hearing aides in both ears. During a record review on 10/24/23 at 9:15 AM…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-10-25 · 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
Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to provide care to a pressure ulcer injury in order to promote healing. Resident Identifiers: #17. Facility Census: #103 Findings included: a) Resident #17 On 10/24/23 at 10:22 AM, a record review of Resident #17's care plan found she had a stage IV pressure injury to her sacrum. Review of her current orders found no Physicians order for pressure ulcer treatment. During an interview on 10/25/23 at 10:00 AM Licensed Practical Nurse Wound Nurse Assistant #124 confirmed Resident #17 did have an open, stage IV pressure injury to her sacrum. She stated the wound care team failed to reassess a treatment order that was limited to fifteen (15) days for the pressure injury treatment. Wound care was provided on 10/18/23 and then the order fell off the Treatment Administration Record (TAR) due to the fifteen (15) day restriction on the antibiotic order. Therefore the pressure injury wound has not been treated for the last six (6) days. This was confirmed by documentation on the TAR for October. The pressure injury was being treated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-10-25 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review, resident interview, observation and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the residents' environment remains as free of accident hazards as is possible. Morning medications were left in Resident #37's room unsupervised and not taken until hours later. Antifungal powder was left on R #90's dresser. These were random opportunities for discovery. Resident identifiers: R #37 and R #90. Facility census: 103. Findings included: a) Resident (R) #37 During an interview and observation on 10/23/23 at 12:22 PM, R #37 retrieved a medicine cup containing 12 pills/tablets from his desk. When questioned, R #37 reported they were his morning medications that the nurse left for him to take. R #37 stated he took one pill, the rest included psyche meds for his head so he didn't take them. On 10/23/23 at 12:27 PM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #179 acknowledged she left the pills in there this morning and added the resident stated he would take them. LPN #179 said she would go get the pills. Review of the medical record on 10/24/23 found LPN #179 signed out…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-10-25 · 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
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure complete and accurate medical records. Resident #204's capacity status was incorrect in PointClickCare (the facility's electronic medical record software.) Resident #37's code status order was incorrect and did not match resident's Care Plan or resident's preference. This is true for two (2) of four (4) residents reviewed for Advanced Directives. Resident identifiers: Resident #204 and Resident #37. Facility census: 103. Findings included: a) Resident #204 When first opening Resident #204's electronic medical record, on 10/23/23 at 4:09 PM, the viewer immediately saw resident's name, gender, date of birth , age, physician, allergies, and code status. The code status was listed as DNR (Do Not Resuscitate), HAS Capacity. The Physician Determination of Capacity, dated 10/13/23, reflected Resident #204 LACKS capacity. During an interview on 10/24/23 at 1:22 PM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) Clinical Supervisor #16 confirmed the error in the medical record and stated she felt it must have happened because two (2)…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2022-07-27 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY . e) Resident #47 On 07/25/22 at approximately 1:20 PM, an observation was made during incontinence care for Resident #47. Nurse Aide (NA) #72 and NA #78 were observed throwing dirty linen and a soiled brief on the floor without a barrier leaving a wet spot directly on the floor. On 07/25/22 at 1:27 PM, NA #78 stated, I forgot, when asked about using a barrier during incontinence care. NA #72 made no statement. Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) # 77 confirmed the dirty linen and the soiled brief should not be put directly on the floor and the items were not discarded into a designated container. The facility policy entitled Perineal Care, step #11 states, Discard disposable items into designated containers . On 07/25/22 on 1:44 PM, the Director of Nursing (DON) was notified. The DON stated I'm embarrassed .I'm sorry. No further information was obtained during the survey process. f) Resident #20 On 07/25/22 at 11:26 AM, Resident #20 was found to be in a transmission-based precaution room for droplet precautions for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-07-27 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure two (2) of 28 sampled residents had a dignified dining experience. Staff stood over residents while assisting them to eat. Resident identifiers: #70 and #57. Facility census: 86. Findings included: a) Resident #70 Observation at 11:42 AM on 07/26/22, found the resident received his noon meal. The resident was in his room, in bed when the meal was served. Nurse Aide (NA) #118 was standing beside the bed looking down on Resident #70 while feeding him. NA #118 was asked if she should sit down when feeding the Resident? NA #118 replied, he's a feeder and I stand up when I feed him. b) Resident #57 On 07/26/22 at 11:45 AM, NA #17 was observed standing by Resident #57's bed looking down on the resident while feeding him the noon meal. Resident #57 was in bed. NA #17 said she usually doesn't sit down when feeding Resident #57. On 07/26/22 at 1:25 PM, the administrator said a nursing assistant should sit down when feeding a resident. The administrator asked if the residents were eating in their rooms? The 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 · D2022-07-27 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY . Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to recognize the resident's right to formulate an advance directive. This was true for one (1) of seven (7) residents reviewed for the care area of advance directives. Resident identifier: #136. Facility census: 86. Findings included: a) Resident #136 Review of the electronic medical record found the Resident was a full code. Review of the current care plan found the following focus: Resident elects to be a Full Code, dated 07/13/22. The Resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The Resident's daughter, the Medical Power of Attorney (MPOA) completed the resident's admission paperwork on 07/13/22. On 07/15/22, the Resident's physician completed a History and Physical (H&P) and hand wrote the following: Here for long term care. He is a full DNR (Do Not Resuscitate) per his request but cannot make other health decisions without help from MPOA. The physician also checked the following Code Status on the H&P, Do Not Resuscitate. On 07/25/22 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 before2022-07-27 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop 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
Based on observation, staff interview and record review the facility failed to implement their abuse policy by reporting all injuries of unknown origin and thoroughly investigating all injuries of unknown origins to determine a possible cause and/or to rule out abuse and/or neglect. This was true for Resident #42 who had bruising to the left side of her head and to both sides of her neck. This was true for one (1) of one (1) resident reviewed for the care area of non pressure skin conditions. Resident Identifier: #42. Facility Census: 86. Findings included: a) Resident #42 Observation of Resident #42 on 07/25/22 at 1:19 PM during the first phase of the Long Term Care Survey Process (LTCSP) found a bruise to the left side of her head and on both sides of her neck. The bruises were deep purple in color. A review of Resident #42's medical record on 07/26/22 found a Non Pressure Skin Report which indicated the resident had bruise to the left side of face which was 4.5 centimeters X 1.8 centimeters X 0 centimeters depth, a bruise to the right side of the neck which was 5.0 centimeters X…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-07-27 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review and staff interview the facility failed to immediately report an injury of unknown origin to appropriate State agencies within the appropriate time frames. Resident #42 had a deep purple bruising to the left side of the head and to both sides of her neck. There was no indication the facility knew how this injury occurred and there was no evidence this injury was reported. This was true for one (1) of one (1) reviewed for the care area of skin conditions non -pressure related. Resident Identifier: #42. Facility Census: 86. Findings Included: a) Resident #42 Observation of Resident #42 on 07/25/22 at 1:19 PM during the first phase of the Long Term Care Survey Process (LTCSP) found a bruise to the left side of her head and on both sides of her neck. The bruises were deep purple in color. A review of Resident #42's medical record on 07/26/22 found a Non Pressure Skin Report which indicated the resident had bruise to the left side of face which was 4.5 centimeters X 1.8 centimeters X 0 centimeters depth, a bruise to the right side of the neck which was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-07-27 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview and record review the facility failed to ensure all injuries of unknown origin are thoroughly investigated to determine a possible cause and/or to rule out abuse and/or neglect. This was true for Resident #42 who had bruising to the left side of her head and to both sides of her neck. This was true for one (1) of one (1) residents reviewed for the care area of non pressure skin conditions. Resident Identifier: #42. Facility Census: 86. Findings included: a) Resident #42 Observation of Resident #42 on 07/25/22 at 1:19 PM during the first phase of the Long Term Care Survey Process (LTCSP) found a bruise to the left side of her head and on both sides of her neck. The bruises were deep purple in color. A review of Resident #42's medical record on 07/26/22 found a Non Pressure Skin Report which indicated the resident had bruise to the left side of face which was 4.5 centimeters X 1.8 centimeters X 0 centimeters depth, a bruise to the right side of the neck which was 5.0 centimeters X 3.0 centimeters X 0 centimeters depth. and a bruise to the left…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-07-27 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to review and revise the care plan when Resident #73 chose not to continue Hospice Care. This was true for 1 (one) of 28 sampled residents. Resident identifier: 73. Facility Census: 86. Findings Included: a) Resident #73 On 7/25/22 at 11:15 AM while reviewing medical records for Resident #73, it was noted the Resident was receiving Hospice Care. After reviewing the current orders, there was no order for the Resident to receive Hospice Care. Review of the current care plan found the resident was receiving Hospice Services. An interview on 7/26/22 at 1:14 PM, with the Administrator, confirmed Hospice Care was declined on 7/15/22 and the care plan was not revised. .
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-07-27 · 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 record review and staff interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #75 only received medications when ordered by the attending physician. Resident #75 received Tramadol on an as needed basis (PRN) from 02/13/22 through 02/20/22. Resident #75's attending physician indicated he never gave the facility an order to administer Tramadol. This was true for one (1) of one (1) resident reviewed for the care area of pain management. Resident Identifier: #75. Facility Census: 86. Findings Included: a) Resident #75 A review of Resident #75's medical record found a nursing progress note dated 01/11/22 (Resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]) which read as follows, Received Fax from (Name of Attending physician) New orders as follows: Change Isosorbide mononitrate 10 mg tid (three times a day) to isosorbide mononitrate ER 30 mg by mouth dialy in am. Also stop Tramadol PCC (point click care) orders updated. Resident #75 was admitted from hospital with a prescription for Tramadol which was discontinued…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-07-27 · 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 record review and staff interview the facility failed to ensure two (2) of eight (8) residents review for the care area of pressure ulcers received care consistent with professional standards of practice to heal or prevent pressure ulcer development. Resident Identifiers: #57 and #70. Facility Census: 86. Findings included: a) Resident #57 While reviewing medical records it was noted Resident #57 was admitted on [DATE]. He was assessed as having a Stage III pressure ulcer upon admission. It was noted by the admitting Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #124 on 5/20/22 that the resident was admitted to facility with an open area to the coccyx. According to the wound evaluation completed by Facility Nurse Practioner (FNP)/Wound Nurse #176 on 05/24/22 with treatment orders included, the resident had a Stage III pressure ulcer, it was 4 (four) days old from admission and present on admission to the right buttock. The FNP wrote the following order for treatment: Cleanse stage III PI (pressure injury) to coccyx…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-07-27 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY . Based on observation, record review, and staff interview the facility failed to ensure the residents environment over which it had control was as free from accident hazards as possible. This has the potential to effect more than an isolated number of residents. For Resident #70 the facility failed to investigate bruising on the Residents forearms to possibly identify any hazards/risks, implement interventions to reduce any hazards/risks and monitor for the effectiveness of any interventions. Resident #69 had medication in the room. In addition, medication was left unattended on top of the medication cart. Resident identifiers: #70 and #69. Facility census: 86. Findings included: a) Resident #70 Review of the Skin/Wound notes in the electronic medical record found the following: -05/09/2022 at 11:21 AM Skin/Wound Note Note Text: Bruising on back of left hand is resolving well. Faded red in color. Resident denies pain to area. -05/16/2022 at 7:11 AM Skin/Wound Note Note Text: Bruising back of left hand is faded…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-07-27 · tag F0691 — failed to provide colostomy / ostomy care — isolatedProvide appropriate colostomy, urostomy, or ileostomy care/services for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to ensure a resident with an ileostomy had physician orders for ileostomy care. This was a random opportunity for discovery. Resident Identifier: #1. Facility Census: 86. Findings included: a) Resident #1 On 7/25/22 at 11:30 AM, during the initial survey interview process Resident #1 stated she didn't feel well because she recently returned from the hospital and her stomach was upset. She proceeded to inform the surveyor she had an ileostomy due to surgery last year. While reviewing her current medical records and orders it was noted there are no orders for ileostomy care to be provided by staff. This was confirmed with the Administrator on 7/27/22 at 9:34 AM. .
- Potential for harm · D2022-07-27 · tag F0732 — isolatedPost nurse staffing information every day.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to have an accurate and completed staff posting. This failed practice had the potential to affect a limited number of residents that reside in the facility. Facility census 86. Findings included: a) Staff posting The staff posting form for 07/13/22, found Only the day shift section was completed for 7a-3p. The facility census, evening and night shifts were not completed. During a review of the facility postings for the last four weeks the following postings were not corrected to reflect the actual hours worked: *07/23/22 staff posting had 3.81, the typed report provided by Administrator had 3.77 Hours Per Patient Day (HPPD). *07/21/22 staff posting had 4.8 HPPD, the typed report provided by Administrator had 4.5 HPPD. *07/20/22 staff posting had 4.54 HPPD, the typed report provided by Administrator had 4.20 HPPD. *07/19/22 staff posting was 3.93 HPPD, the typed report provided by Administrator had 3.83 HPPD. On 07/27/22 at 2:37 PM, Administrator was shown the inaccurate staff posting. No further information was provided.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-07-27 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY . Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to ensure pharmaceutical services were provided to each resident to meet their needs and to ensure an accurate reconciliation of each controlled substance. Resident #75 was administered tramadol after the medication was discontinued in part because the medication was not removed from the medication cart in a timely manner after the discontinuance of the drug. In addition when the remaining tramadol were destroyed the licensed pharmacist was the only person to sign the Disposition of Drug section. This was a random opportunity for discovery and was true for Resident #75. Resident Identifier: #75. Facility Census: 86. Findings Included: a) Resident #75 A review of Resident #75's medical record found a nursing progress note dated 01/11/22 (Resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]) which read as follows, Received Fax from (Name of Attending physician) New orders as follows: Change Isosorbide mononitrate 10 mg tid (three times a day) to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-07-27 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to ensure medication irregularities identified by the Pharmacist, and accepted by the physician were implemented. This was true for one (1) of five (5) residents reviewed for the care area of unnecessary medications. Resident Identifier: #1 Facility Census: 86. Findings Included: a) Resident #1 On 7/27/22 at 9:00 AM while reviewing medical records it was noted on the October, 2021 Consultation Report from the pharmacist, the Physician accepted the recommendation to change the timing on a medication (Bumex) from 9:00 PM to earlier in the evening due to this being a diuretic. This was not completed. On the 06/2022 Consultation Report from the pharmacist, the Physician accepted the recommendation to have the Residents Hemoglobin A1C laboratory level checked and monitored. This was not completed and there are no orders to monitor the A1C in the future. These two findings were confirmed with the Administrator on 7/27/22 at 9:34 AM. .
- Potential for harm · D2022-07-27 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY . Based on observation and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure foods were stored in a safe and sanitary manner. This failed practice had the potential to affect a limited number of residents. Facility census: 86. Findings included: a) Initial tour of the kitchen During the initial tour of the kitchen on 07/25/22 at 10:48 AM, with the dietary manager, observation found a large silver tray containing strips of uncooked bacon in the walk - in refrigerator. There was no date on the tray of bacon to determine when the bacon was removed from the original packaging or when the bacon would expire and need to be discarded. In addition a plastic bag containing at least 10 hot dog [NAME], removed from the original packaging, was present on a storage cart in the walk- in refrigerator. There was no date to determine when the hot dog [NAME] were opened or would the [NAME] would need to be discarded. The Dietary Manager provided no explanation for the above observations. .
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-07-27 · 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 record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the medical records for Resident's #136 and #42 were accurate and correct. This was true for three (3) of 28 resident records reviewed during the long term care survey. Resident identifiers: #136 and #42. Facility census: 86. Findings included: a) Resident #136 Medical record review found the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. On 07/13/22 a nursing admission assessment was completed indicating the resident had no pressure ulcers. The only skin issue was healed scratches to the feet. On 7/16/22 a pressure ulcer assessment, noted a Deep Tissue injury (DTI) to the left buttock. On 07/26/22 at 1:00 PM, the wound treatment nurse, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #14 said the resident never had a pressure ulcer. A weekend nurse wrote that but I came in and looked on Monday and there is no pressure ulcer. I guess I should have clarified that somewhere in the medical record. The nurse surveyor observed the resident and found no…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“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
$8,278 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $8,278 — penalty dated 2025-08-28
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.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| CITIZENS BANK OF WV | Organization | 5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST | since 03/01/2021 |
| JONES, BETSY | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 08/07/2005 |
| SHAVER, TARA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 04/26/2018 |
| GODWIN, RAYMOND | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 01/01/2019 |
| RIFFEE, WILLIAM | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; GENERAL PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | since 01/01/2017 |
| TOMBLYN, MARK | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; GENERAL PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | since 01/01/2015 |
| WILMOTH, ROBERT | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; GENERAL PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | since 01/01/2017 |
| COLLETT, DENA | Individual | GENERAL PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | since 01/01/2020 |
| DAVIS, MATTHEW | Individual | GENERAL PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | since 01/01/2017 |
| ELZA, SANDRA | Individual | GENERAL PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | since 01/01/2019 |
| GAINER, KURT | Individual | GENERAL PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | since 01/01/2015 |
| HALL, R. | Individual | GENERAL PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | since 01/01/2020 |
| KESSLER, HERK | Individual | GENERAL PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | since 11/23/2013 |
| MORRIS, ROBBIE | Individual | GENERAL PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | since 01/01/2021 |
| PHILLIPS, ROBERT | Individual | GENERAL PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | since 01/01/2020 |
| PHIPPS, TERRI | Individual | GENERAL PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | since 01/01/2019 |
| SHOEMAKER, CHAD | Individual | GENERAL PARTNERSHIP INTEREST | since 01/01/2020 |
| CHUA, CATHERINE | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/05/2026 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 27 rows in the source record cover these 18 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in WV
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 West 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 515025. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-08-28, 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.