Nella's At Autumn Lake Healthcare
499 Ferguson Road, Elkins, WV 26241 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 100 certified beds · (304) 636-1008 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)
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Nov 2023
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
- 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 $59,810 in federal fines (most recent 2025-08-05)
- 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 | 5 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 held steady at 2 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 | 6.7% | 14.7% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 3.6% | 6.3% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.4% | 0.4% | 0.9% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.3% | 1.6% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 3.9% | 7.6% | 6.5% | better |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.2% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 1.9% | 4.4% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 7.8% | 15.9% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 13.1% | 27.0% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 99.0% | 97.6% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 6.2% | 4.2% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 22.9% | 22.1% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 37.2% | 13.4% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.0% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 79.4% | 79.4% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.58 | 1.80 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.83 | 1.84 | 1.80 | better |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
39.2% 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 32 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 66.7% 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 24 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 0.10 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 6% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 1% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 39.2%CMS range 25.0–54.0 | 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 | 10.5%CMS range 7.5–15.4 | 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 | 66.7% | 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 | 29.2% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 41.7% | 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 | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.2%CMS range 3.9–12.5 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.03 | 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 100 beds and averages 94.7 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 5 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.29 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.54 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.91 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 3.05 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.39 on weekdays — 10% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.59 to 0.42 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 44% 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 unchanged from the previous inspection. 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.
- Immediate jeopardy · Lcited before2025-08-05 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — widespreadEnsure 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, record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the environment over which it had control was as free from accident hazards as possible. Hot water temperatures in resident areas exceeded 120 degrees Fahrenheit (F). This deficient practice was determined to be an immediate jeopardy situation that placed all residents at risk for burns from hot water. Facility census: 91.Findings included:a) Hot water temperatures The facility's policy statement titled Safe Water Temperatures, with no implementation or revision dates given, stated as follows:Direct care staff will monitor residents during prolonged exposure to to warm or hot water for any signs or symptoms of burns, and will respond appropriately. Staff will be educated on safe water temperatures upon employment and on a regular basis. Thermometers will be available as needed for use by all staff. Staff will report abnormal findings, such as complaints of water too cold or hot, burns or redness, or any problems with water temperatures (ex. water is painful to touch or causes redness) to 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 · F2025-12-30 · tag F0801 — widespreadEmploy sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, including a qualified dietician.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to employ a Certified Dietary Manager with appropriate credentials. The facility also failed to ensure that the Nutrition Services Staff had the County / State specified certification for safe handling of food. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all residents receiving meals in the facility. Facility Census: 96.Findings included:During an interview, on 12/29/25 at 12:35 PM, the surveyor asked Food Service Manager (FSM) #61 if he was a Certified Dietary Manager (CDM), and he stated, No I am not. The surveyor asked if they had a full-time Registered Dietician (RD) on staff, and he said No. During an interview, on 12/29/25 at 1:10 PM, the Administrator and the Director of Nursing (DON) indicated the facility did not have a full-time registered dietitian in the building. She comes to facility once per week and is available remotely as needed.On 12/29/25 at 1:00 PM this surveyor asked FSM #61 for a copy of the staffing policy. He said that the staff belong to the facility and he was contracted through Healthcare…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-12-30 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and staff interview, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food safety. Additionally, the facility failed to maintain the equipment in safe and clean operating condition. This practice had the potential to affect all of the residents at the facility. Facility census: 96.Findings included:a) During a walkthrough of the kitchen on 12/29/25 at 12:40 PM there were multiple cases of disposable utensils, plates and cups sitting directly on the floor. The surveyor asked Food Service Manager (FSM) #61 if those items are allowed to be sitting directly on the floor, and he said Yes, because they are in boxes and are individually wrapped.There was one (1) bag of opened breadcrumbs in the dry storage room that were not sealed correctly and was not labeled or dated correctly. The FSM acknowledged that they should have been stored and dated properly and will fix it.There were two (2) full size sheet pans of turkey stock located in the walk-in refrigerator with a made date of 12/19/25. There was no use by…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-12-30 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide 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 a sanitary environment to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections by not having paper towels at (2) two of the handwashing sinks in the kitchen. This failed practice had the potential to affect all residents currently living at the facility. Facility Census: 96.Findings included:a) During a walkthrough of the kitchen, on 12/29/25 at 12:50 PM, this surveyor washed his hands at the handwashing sink outside of the Food Services Manager's (FSM) office inside the kitchen and there were no paper towels to dry my hands. The FSM said, Someone must have used the last one and did not refill them. He gave me a cleaning towel to dry my hands with. During the same walkthrough, on 12/29/25 at 12:56 PM, this surveyor noticed that there were no paper towels located at the handwashing sink in the dish room. The FSM stated, There should be, but someone must have forgotten to refill them too.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-12-30 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, resident interview and policy review the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, comfortable, homelike environment. This failed practice was a random opportunity for discovery and had the potential to affect more than a limited number of residents during the complaint survey. Resident identifiers #73, and #74. Facility census 96. Findings include:a) Water temperature in A Wing shower roomDuring an interview on 12/29/25 at 2:45 PM, Resident #73 who has a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 14 and stated, The showers are not hot, they are luke warm, Sometimes I will just do a bed bath because I know it will be warmer. The problem is, the crap is old.During an interview on 12/29/25 at 3:00 PM Resident #74 who has a BIMS score of 15 said that the showers are not very warm at all. The showers seem to be warmer if its earlier in the day. During an interview and observation on 12/29/25 at 3:10 PM, the Maintenance Supervisor (MS) took the temperature of the shower stall water in shower room (1) one on A wing. The shower stall water ran 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 · E2025-08-05 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to develop and/or implement individualized care plans related to Activities, Depression, and Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome (PTSD). This failed practice was found true for (7) seven of 27 residents reviewed for care plan accuracy during the Long-Term Care Survey Process. Resident identifiers #5, #74, #83, #9, #13, #42, and #72. Facility census 91. a) Resident #9 Under the Activities Section of the Care Plan, the goal was Will have the opportunity to enjoy activities of choice through the next review date. Interventions were: Invite/encourage resident to attend activities daily. Provide resident with a calendar of scheduled activities. Remind resident at least 15 minutes prior to the start of the activity. Resident requires assistance with mobility to and from activities. However, the Care Plan did not state what activities the resident enjoys doing. This resident has diagnoses of PTSD, Anxiety, and Depression. Her Care Plan included Anxiety but did…
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 · E2025-08-05 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — patternDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on policy review, resident interviews, record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure residents and/or responsible party as well as required staff were included in care plan meetings. In addition, a care plan was not revised when new medications were added. This failed practice affected three (3) of 27 sample residents. Resident identifiers: #38, #86, #11. Facility census: 91.Findings included: a) Resident #11 On 08/04/2025, Resident # 11's Pharmacy Orders were reviewed. Two psychotropic medications, Tramadol and Lorazepam, were not included on the resident's comprehensive care plan. On 08/05/2025 at 08:51 AM, the Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed the medications were not included on the care plan and stated, Tramadol was recently started. and Okay. b) Resident #38 The Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) provided a copy of the policy titled Comprehensive Care Plans with a date reviewed/revised of 04/28/25 on 08/05/25 at 4:00 PM. A review of the policy found the following: The comprehensive care plan will be prepared by the interdisciplinary team, that…
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 · E2025-08-05 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — patternProvide activities to meet all resident's needs.
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 record review the facility failed to provide an ongoing program of activities to meet the needs and interest of each resident. This failed practice was found true for (3) three of (6) six residents reviewed for activities during the Long-Term Care Survey Process. Resident identifiers #5, #74, #83. Facility Census 91.Findings include: a) Resident #5 During the initial observation on 07/30/25 at 10:30 am, showed Resident #5 lying in her bed, patting her blanket. Resident was hollering out. No stimulation was on in the resident's room.A record review on 08/04/25 at 1:00 PM, revealed an activity care plan initiated 05/27/25 for Resident #5 that reads as follows: Focus:Activities. Goal:Will have the opportunity to enjoy activities of choice through the next review date. Interventions:Activities staff to provide in room visits and 1:1 visits.Invite/encourage resident to attend activities daily.Provide resident with a calendar of scheduled activities.Remind resident at least…
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 before2025-08-05 · 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, and staff interview the facility failed to store, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. This failed practice was a random opportunity for discovery and the potential to affect more than a limited number of residents during the Long-Term Care Survey Process. Facility census: 91. Findings include: a) Kitchen An observation on 08/05/25 at approximately 12:45 PM revealed the cook was starting to fix plates. The first plate the cook pulled out of the plate holder was wet. The cook then placed a tuna hoagie and chips on the plate. The cook then handed the plate to the kitchen aide to put on the tray cart. The cook then pulled out the next plate that was wet and put chopped tuna on it. The State Agency (SA) asked, Are all of those plates wet? The Certified Dietary Manager (CDM) started pulling plates from the plate holder and all the plates that she pulled off were wet. The CDM stated, Go get Styrofoam trays from our emergency stock and serve lunch on those today? The CDM then went to check out the dishwasher 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 · E2025-08-05 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — patternSafeguard 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. For five (5) of six (6) residents reviewed for the care area of advance directives, the Physician Order for Scope of Treatment (POST) forms were incomplete. For two (2) of three (3) residents reviewed for the care area of beneficiary notices, the beneficiary notices were incomplete. For one (1) of six (6) residents reviewed for the care area of nutrition, the admission weight documentation was incorrect. Resident Identifiers: #86, #60, #21, #4, #94, #62, #72, and #84. Facility census: 91. Findings included:a) Resident #72 The facility failed to verify and document the legal authority of the resident’s designated representatives, failed to ensure the validity and proper execution of the resident’s POST (Physician Orders for Scope of Treatment) form, and failed to retain complete documentation of consent for high-risk physical interventions. The resident’s record included a signed Checklist for Surrogate Selection dated 11/17/22 identifying Son #1 as the medical power 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 before2025-08-05 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — 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 provide a clean, comfortable, homelike environment. This failed practice was a random opportunity for discovery and had the potential to affect a limited number of residents during the Long-Term Care Survey Process. Facility Census: 91. Findings include: a) room [ROOM NUMBER]-B The initial observation on 07/30/25 at 11:16 AM, revealed in the bathroom of room [ROOM NUMBER]-B, around the entire base of the toilet was a dried orange, yellow and brown substance. The floor was sticky, and the bathroom had a strong urine odor. During an interview on 07/31/25 at 12:28 PM, The Housekeeping Supervisor (HS) confirmed that the bathroom was dirty, and stated, I will get that cleaned up.
Show the remaining 24 citations
- Potential for harm · D2025-08-05 · tag F0628 — isolatedProvide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
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 documentation that required transfer information was provided to the receiving hospital. This deficient practice had the potential to affect one (1) of two (2) residents reviewed for care area of hospitalization. Resident identifier: #21. Facility census: 91. Findings included:a) Resident #21 Review of Resident #21's electronic medical records showed the resident was transferred to the hospital on [DATE] due to a fall, altered mental status, and an elevated blood glucose level. Further review of Resident #21's electronic medical records did not reveal documentation regarding what information was sent to the hospital to which the resident was transferred. On 08/04/2025 at 3:07 PM, the Director of Nursing (DON) provided a document titled Acute Care Transfer Document Checklist. The document had Resident #21's name written on it, along with the date 07/13/25. The document gave the following instructions: Copies sent with resident, check all…
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 before2025-08-05 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based upon record review and staff interview, the facility failed to accurately reflect the resident's diagnoses in the assessment. This was found to be true for one (1) of twenty-seven (27) residents reviewed during the annual survey process. Resident identifier: #9. Facility census: 91.Findings included: a) Resident #9 A review of the electronic health record reflects the Resident has the following diagnoses related to mental health:ANXIETY DISORDER, UNSPECIFIED 6/17/2024MAJOR DEPRESSIVE DISORDER, RECURRENT SEVERE WITHOUT PSYCHOTIC FEATURES 6/17/2024POST-TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER, UNSPECIFIED 6/17/2024 The most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment was completed on 06/26/25. Under Section I: Active Diagnoses, Psychiatric/Mood Disorder, the facility only marked Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Anxiety disorder or depression were not marked. These findings were reviewed with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 08/04/25 at 1:00 PM. The DON acknowledged the error.
- Potential for harm · D2025-08-05 · tag F0644 — isolatedCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based upon record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to update the Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) when new diagnoses were given. This was found to be true for two (2) of eight (8) residents reviewed during the annual survey process. Resident identifiers: #9, #42. Facility census: 91. Findings included: a) Resident #9 A review of the electronic health record reflected the Resident had the following diagnoses related to mental health:ANXIETY DISORDER, UNSPECIFIED 6/17/2024MAJOR DEPRESSIVE DISORDER, RECURRENT SEVERE WITHOUT PSYCHOTIC FEATURES 6/17/2024POST-TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER, UNSPECIFIED 6/17/2024 The resident's most recent Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) was completed on 09/25/24 by the facility. Under the section III, MI/MR, Current Diagnosis, None was marked. There is a box for Major Depression, but it was not selected. There is also a selection for Other Relation Conditions, and it was not marked. Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and Anxiety could have been specified in that section. The resident's Medical…
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 · D2025-08-05 · tag F0745 — failed to provide medically-related social services — isolatedProvide medically-related social services to help each resident achieve the highest possible quality of life.
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 upon record review and staff interview, the facility failed to provide medically-related social services to assist the resident in attaining or maintaining their mental and psychosocial health. This was found to be true to one (1) of six (6) residents reviewed during the annual survey process. Resident identifier: #9. Facility census: 91. Findings included:a) Resident #9Upon admission to the facility on [DATE], the Resident had a diagnosis of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), Anxiety and Major Depressive Disorder, Recurrent and Severe. The diagnosis for PTSD was also found on her Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review Assessment. A review of her medical record documents revealed, a Social Service Assessment, was performed by the Director of Social Services on 06/20/24. Section G of this document consisted of a Trauma Screen. The resident responded No to all the questions, thus scoring negative for trauma. Resident #9's care plan document stated she had a communiction problem related to choosing…
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 · D2025-08-05 · tag F0825 — isolatedProvide or get specialized rehabilitative services as required for a resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on policy review, record review and staff interview, the facility failed to provide specialized rehabilitation services for speech therapy. This failed practice was found to be true for two (2) of two (2) residents during the annual survey process and had the potential to affect a limited number of residents. Resident Identifiers: #6 and #84. Facility Census: 91. a) Resident #84 A record review on 08/04/25 at 11:45 AM, revealed that Resident #84 was ordered a regular diet, regular texture, thin liquids diet on 02/07/25. The diet was changed on 07/25/25 to a regular diet, puree texture, thin liquids. A record review of Resident #84's weights shows that her actual admission weight, taken the day after admission was 116.4 pounds (lbs.) and her current weight taken on 07/07/25 was 110 lbs. Further record review revealed that Resident #84 had ordered supplements throughout the weight loss but had not had any Speech Therapy Consults before her diet was downgraded to the puree texture. During a telephone…
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 before2025-08-05 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. The facility failed to follow appropriate infection control practices during medication administration. The facility also failed to follow enhanced barrier precautions. These were random opportunities for discovery. Resident Identifiers: #27 and #6. Facility Census: 91.Findings included:a) Resident #27 The facility's policy titled Medication Administration, with no date of implementation or revision documented, gave instructions to take care not to touch medications with bare hands while removing the medications from their source. On 07/31/2025 at 9:23 AM, Registered Nurse (RN) #33 was observed administering medications to Resident #27. The medications were contained in blister packs. Each dose was individually sealed within the pack and needed to be pushed through the package by the nurse.…
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 before2024-07-04 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY . Based on observation, resident interviews and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure resident room temperatures were maintained between 71 to 81 degrees Fahrenheit (F). This failed practice has the potential to affect more than a limited number of residents. Facility census: 87. Findings include: An unannounced complaint investigation was conducted. Upon entering the building, an interview was conducted with Registered Nurse (RN) # 42 at 9:20 AM. When asked if the building was hot on 06/29/24. RN # 42 answered it was hot especially on B side of the building. I understand parts have been ordered. After meeting with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) and providing a request of documents and electronic medical record access, a tour was conducted on the A Hall at 12:22 PM. The outside temperature was 77 degrees F at the time. Observations of the resident rooms on the A Hall found the following concerns: 110 No air conditioning (AC) 104 Resident #49 complained the room was too hot and the AC unit was not…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-04 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — isolatedKeep all essential equipment working safely.
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 and staff interview, the facility failed to maintain a functioning room air conditioner when water was leaking from the air conditioning unit in room [ROOM NUMBER] on A Hall. Facility census: 87. Findings include: a) room [ROOM NUMBER] On 07/02/24 at 12:46 PM Resident #50 stated, the air conditioning unit had been leaking into the floor from the time she was admitted which was about a year ago. She stated, they put towels around it because the water runs down the floor. Resident #50 stated, she was afraid she could fall with the water in the floor. An observation of the unit found the filter was partially pulled out and was wet. The unit fan would not turn on. NHA was told about the leak at 1:40 PM on 07/02/24. An interview with the Maintenance Director on 07/03/24 at approximately 9:30 AM confirmed he didn't have a work order regarding the unit leaking. He stated, the drain tube was plugged up and had been opened. An additional observation found the floor dry 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.
- Potential for harm · E2023-11-08 · 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, policy review, resident council meeting minutes, and staff interview, the facility failed to consider the voiced concerns of residents in resident council as grievances. The facility also failed to make grievances forms accessible to all residents and/or residents' family/representatives residing in the facility. This had the potential to affect an unlimited amount of residents living in the facility. Facility census: 79. Findings Included: A review of the facility policy titled Grievances/Complaints Filing with a revision date of 10/2019 read as follows: .Policy Interpretation and Implementation .Grievances and/or complaints may be submitted orally or in writing and may be filed anonymously. During the Long-Term Care Survey Process from 11/06/23 to 11/08/23, many observations throughout the facility revealed no evidence of grievance forms were made accessible to the residents and/or resident representatives. During an interview on 11/07/23 at 1:15 PM, the Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #22 stated if someone has a grievance or concern I give them the Ombudsman…
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 · E2023-11-08 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — patternProtect 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on resident interview, record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from sexually aggressive behavior (such as making sexually explicit comments and forced observation of masturbation and exposure ) from Resident #59. The lack of action from the facility to address and protect the other residents resulted in an immediate jeopardy situation for more than an isolated number of residents. The facility was notified of the immediate jeopardy on 11/07/23 at 5:01 PM. The plan of correction, as follows, was accepted at 6:57 PM on 11/07/23: -Resident #59 will be placed on 24 hour, one on one supervision effective 5:00 pm on November 7, 2023, to protect all residents. Documentation will be done q (every) 15 minutes as to what the resident is doing, and log will be maintained. (Log attached) -An immediate report will be submitted to OHFLAC, APS, and the Regional Ombudsman on November 7, 2023. -Resident #132 will be moved over to B-Side of facility at his request. This will 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 · Ecited before2023-11-08 · tag F0641 — patternEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
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 an accurate assessment for five (5) of 19 residents whose Minimum Data Sets (MDS's) were reviewed. Resident identifiers: #31, #15, #56, #36 and #26. Facility census 79. Findings included: a) Resident #31 During a review of medical records found Resident #31 was coded in the Minimum Data Set (MDS) to have Physical Restraints (Physical restraints are any manual method or physical or mechanical device, material or equipment attached or adjacent to the resident's body that the individual cannot remove easily which restricts freedom of movement or normal access to one's body.) Observation on 11/06/23 at 12:45 PM, found Resident #31 was seen in his room in the bed sleeping, no physical restraints were being used. On 11/07/23 at 3:20 PM, the Director of Nursing (DON) was asked what type of physical restraints does Resident #31 have? DON said Resident # 31's restraints were discontinued in January. The DON was shown that the resident was coded for having side rails, used daily as a physical restraint. However, Resident…
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 · E2023-11-08 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — patternProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such 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 medicate for pain in a timely manner and failed to evaluate pain using a pain scale to measure the level of pain a resident was experiencing. This is true for two (2) of two (2) reviewed in the care area of pain. Resident identifiers: #132 and #181. Facility census 79. Findings included: a 1) Resident # 132 Observation of the physical condition of the resident found his left leg was very large, with gauze wrapped around the lower part of the leg between the knee and ankle. His left arm and hand appear to have contractures. He was sitting in a wheelchair. On 11/06/23 at 3:04 PM, Resident # 132 said he was admitted on [DATE] and did not get his pain medication for several days. Resident #132 went on to say he had to make the staff send him to a local hospital to get some medicine for his pain in his left leg, groin area and abdomen. He said the facility doctor told him that he ordered pain medication before he went to the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-11-08 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation and staff interview the facility failed to store utensils in a sanitary manner. This practice had the potential to affect all residents that receive nourishment from the facility kitchen. Facility Census: 79. a) Kitchen Utensils The Certified Dietary Manager (CDM) was not present upon entering the facility. Dietary Aide (DA) #37 oversaw the building on the initial tour of the kitchen on 11/06/23 beginning at 10:54 AM. Tour revealed the following: The three (3) drawer utensils cabinet revealed all utensils were not turned the same way. When someone went to find a serving utensil, they would have had to touch the utensils by the serving part to remove it from the cabinet. During an immediate interview the Dietary Aide (DA) #37 acknowledged the utensils handles should all be turned in the same direction.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-11-08 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on resident interview, observation and staff interview, the facility failed to provide residents with furniture in good repair. This was a random opportunity for discovery. Resident identifiers: Resident #17. Facility Census: 79. Findings included: a) Resident #17 During an initial tour of the facility on 11/06/23 at 11:53 AM, Resident #17's over the bed table's trim was loose and hanging off the table on the floor. While Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #66 was moving the table, the trim that was loose was on the floor and the LPN was pulling the strip while moving the table. During another observation on 11/07/23 at 11:57 AM, Resident #17's over the bed table's trim was still broken. Resident #17 stated the table has been like this for two months and keeps getting worse. During an interview on 11/08/23 at 9:57 AM, Maintenance #93 acknowledged the table needed to be replaced and should have been when the trim started to come loose.
- Potential for harm · D2023-11-08 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on resident interview, staff interview and record review, the facility failed to report an alleged allegation of sexual abuse to the State Survey Agency, Adult Protective Services, and the Ombudsman. This was a random opportunity for discovery. Resident identifier: #132. Facility census: 79. Findings included: a) Facility Policy- Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation VII. Reporting/Response Reporting of all alleged violations to the Administrator, state agency, adult protective services, and all other required agencies (e.g. law enforcement when applicable) within specified timeframe's: Immediately, but not later than 2 hours after the allegation is made, if the events that cause the allegation involve abuse or result in serious bodily injury . b) Resident #132 Review of the facility's narrative of complaints filed in the last six (6) months on the morning of 11/7/23, provided to the survey team by the Social Worker (SW) #2 found the summary dated 11/04/23: (Typed as written): (Name of Resident #132) reported…
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 · D2023-11-08 · tag F0645 — isolatedPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure the resident's Pre admission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) reflected pre-admission diagnoses for one (1) of two (2) residents reviewed for the category of PASRR. Resident #26 was diagnosed with Schizophrenia . The lack of pre-screening resulted in the resident's condition not being evaluated through the Level II PASRR process. Resident identifier: Resident #26. Facility Census: 79. Findings Included: a) Resident #26 During a record review, on 11/07/23 at 10:18 AM, Resident #36's medical record revealed admitting diagnoses included unspecified psychosis and schizophrenia. Further review of the medical record revealed a PASRR dated 03/10/23, Section 30 Current Diagnosis, was coded D. Seizure Disorder, G schizophrenic Disorder was not coded. During an interview on 11/07/23 at 10:29 AM Social Services #2 stated, I did not complete the PASRR, that was a previous facility. SS #2 acknowledged the PASRR was not coded correctly for the Schizophrenia diagnosis on admission.
- Potential for harm · D2023-11-08 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to complete neuro checks after an unwitnessed fall. This was a random opportunity for discovery and has the potential to affect a limited number of residents that currently reside in the facility. Resident identifier: #350. Facility census 77. Findings included: a) Resident #350 During a review of reportable made by the facility, Resident #350 had an unwitnessed fall on 11/28/23 at 6:15 AM in the bathroom. Facility policy titled, Neurological Assessment/Evaluation Policy: The nurse performs neurological checks, whenever there is the possibility of a head injury. A neurological evaluation will be performed on any un-witnessed fall. Purpose: Accurate assessment/evaluation, and monitoring for changes in resident's neurological status to allow prompt medical notification/treatment. After the initial assessment, the neurological exam is repeated every 15 minutes x 3 (1hour), every 30 minutes times two (2) hours, every hour for four (4) hours, then every shift for six (6) days. A review of the facility forms named AUTM NEURO…
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 before2023-11-08 · 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, record review and staff interview facility failed to ensure adequate supervision was maintained to ensure safety during medication administration for Resident #55. This failed practice was a random opportunity for discovery and had the potential to affect more than a limited number of Residents. Resident identifier: #55. Facility census: 79 Findings included: On 11/08/23 08:57 AM, observation was made of Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #22 briskly walking into the A Hall dining room with a cup of medications and a small cup of water. LPN #22 tapped Resident #55 on the shoulder to wake him. LPN #22 set the cup of mediations on the dining room table, called the Resident by his first name, and told him, Here is your meds. LPN #22 then turned and briskly walked off, leaving the cup of medications on the table in the dining hall. Resident #55 was accompanied by Resident #24 at the table. Resident #55 dumped out the pills onto the dining room table and began to push them around on the table, unsupervised by any staff. During an interview on 11/08/23 at 9:10 AM, LPN…
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 · D2023-11-08 · tag F0943 — isolatedGive their staff education on dementia care, and what abuse, neglect, and exploitation are; and how to report abuse, neglect, and exploitation.
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 training to all staff (direct and indirect care) that included activities that constitute abuse, neglect, exploitation, and misappropriation of resident property, the procedures for reporting incidents of abuse, neglect, exploitation or the misappropriation of resident property and Dementia management and resident abuse prevention. This was true for two (2) of five (5) staff reviewed. Staff identifiers: #81 and #60. This had the potential to affect more than a limited number of Residents at the facility. Facility census: 79. Findings included: On 11/08/23 starting at 8:39 AM, five employee files were reviewed with the Human Resources/Payroll manager, HR #65. a) Dietary Aide #60 Dietary Aide #60 was employed on 10/23/23. The time card report was reviewed with HR #65. DA #60 worked on 10/23/23, 10/24/23, 10/26/23, 10/28/23, 10/29/23, 10/30/23, 11/01/23, 11/02/23, and 11/05/23. HR #65 confirmed DA #60 did not have training in activities that constitute abuse, neglect, exploitation, and misappropriation 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 · D2023-11-08 · tag F0947 — failed to train nurse aides adequately — isolatedEnsure nurse aides have the skills they need to care for residents, and give nurse aides education in dementia care and abuse prevention.
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 required in-service training for nurse aides which included dementia management training and resident abuse prevention training. This was true for one (1) of two (2) nurse aides reviewed and had the potential to affect more than a limited number of residents. Staff identifier: #81. Facility census: 79. Findings included: a) Nurse Aide #81 On 11/08/23 starting at 8:39 AM, the employee file of NA #81 was reviewed with the Human Resources/Payroll manager, HR #65. Nurse Aide (NA) #81 was employed on 10/12/23. NA #81 had worked the following shifts since her employment: 10/12/23, 10/13/23, 10/14/23, 10/15/23, 10/19/23, 10/20/23, 10/21/23, 10/22/23, 10/27/23, 10/28/23, 10/29/23, 11/02/23, 11/03/23, 11/04/23 and 11/05/23. HR #65 confirmed NA #81 did not receive training in activities that constitute abuse, neglect, exploitation, and misappropriation of resident property, the procedures for reporting incidents of abuse, neglect, exploitation or the misappropriation of resident property and Dementia management 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 · E2021-06-02 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — patternHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
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, observation, record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure that each resident had the opportunity to exercise autonomy regarding preferences that are important to their life. The facility failed to provide meal preferences to a resident who desired to be served eggs for meals. This was true for one (1) of four (4) residents reviewed for the care area of nutrition. Resident identifier #59. Facility census: 67. Findings included: a) Resident #59 An interview with Resident #59, on 06/01/21 12:47 PM revealed weight loss. Resident stated, I don't eat much. They said they would serve me breakfast foods all day. This happened for a few days but not anymore, look I got potato soup, pimento sandwich and fruit cocktail. That is a nasty sandwich. An immediate observation of Resident #59's food tray, on 06/01/21 at 12:47 PM revealed a bowl of cream soup, a pimento sandwich and a bowl of fruit cocktail. A brief record review, on 06/01/21 at 1:30 PM, revealed a weight record…
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 · E2021-06-02 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY . Based on observation and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility were stored and labeled in accordance with current accepted professional standards. Medications stored in two (2) of (2) medication storage rooms were expired and one (1) of two (2) medication carts inspected did not have medications dated when opened when put in to use. This practice had the potential to effect more than a limited number of residents. Facility census: 67. Findings included: a) Medication Cart (B Side) Observation An observation of the B side Medication cart, on [DATE] at 3:01 PM revealed a stock medication, Ferrous Sulfate 324 mg (milligrams), opened with no date noted. An interview on [DATE], at 3:01 PM, with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #14, revealed the bottle of Ferrous Sulfate was opened and being used. In addition, LPN #14 verified there was no date when the bottle was opened and put in to use. LPN #14, stated further, the facility policy is for stock medications to 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 · D2021-06-02 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure one (1) of 18 residents reviewed during the long-term care survey process had a Physician Orders for Scope of Treatment (POST) form completed per directions specified by the [NAME] Virginia Center for End-of-Life Care in conjunction with the [NAME] Virginia Health Care Decisions Act (16-30-1). Resident identifier: #60. Facility census: 67. Findings included: a) Resident #60 A record review, on 06/01/21 at 2:17 PM, found a [NAME] Virginia Physician Orders for Scope of Treatment (POST) form on Resident #60's chart. The POST form was signed by Resident #60's Health Care Surrogate (HCS). Under Section E, no information about Resident #60's HCS was provided, leaving the name, address, and telephone number blank. The 2016 edition of Using the POST Form - Guidance for Healthcare Professionals, compiled by the [NAME] Virginia Center for End-of-Life, states: For situations when the person loses or has lost decision-making capacity, the name, address, and phone number of the person legally authorized to make healthcare…
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.
- No harm found · C2023-11-08 · tag F0732 — widespreadPost nurse staffing information every day.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to ensure staff posting was correct. This was a random opportunity for discovery and had the potential to affect all Residents at the facility. Facility census: 79. Findings included: On 11/08/23 at 9:52 AM, the staff posting, dated revealed a posting dated 11/06/23. This was reviewed with the administrator. The administrator confirmed the posting of nurse aides (NA's) for the 11 PM to 7 AM shift was incorrect. The posting noted 6 NAs were working. The administrator said 6 NAs were scheduled but one (1) called in. The staff posting was not changed to reflect only 5 NA's working on the 11 PM to 7 AM shift.
“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
$59,810 in federal fines across 2 penalties.
- $22,474 — penalty dated 2025-08-05
- $37,336 — penalty dated 2023-11-08
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 AUTUMN LAKE HEALTHCARE — 59 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 | 2.8 | -1.8 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 1 of 5 | 2.5 | -1.5 vs chain |
| Staffing | 4 of 5 | 2.4 | +1.6 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 4.3 | -0.3 vs chain |
The other 58 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.8★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 58; lowest-rated first.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NELLAS OPCO HOLDCO LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 06/01/2021 |
| A & R STERN FAMILY WV HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | 99% | since 06/01/2021 |
| STERN, ARYEH | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/01/2021 |
| BOLYARD, JONTHAN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/06/2021 |
| CHUA, CATHERINE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2024 |
| SCHWARTZ, MARK | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 06/01/2021 |
| A STERN FAMILY TRUST WV | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/01/2021 |
| ACCURATE STAFFING LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/01/2021 |
| BRAND SONNENSCHINE LLP | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/01/2021 |
| R STERN FAMILY TRUST | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/01/2021 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 14 rows in the source record cover these 10 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
6 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 87% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $128K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in 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 515196. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-08-05, 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.