Fayetteville Healthcare Center
100 Hresan Boulevard, Fayetteville, WV 25840 · For profit - Corporation · 60 certified beds · (304) 574-0770 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- 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
- inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
- a high number of inspection citations overall (40) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $46,232 in federal fines (most recent 2024-07-06)
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- about 32% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
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 | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 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 — 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 | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 1 to 3 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 | 4.0% | 14.7% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 11.1% | 6.3% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.4% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.5% | 1.6% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.5% | 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 | 6.9% | 4.4% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 10.5% | 15.9% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 34.1% | 27.0% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 97.6% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 1.1% | 4.2% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 14.3% | 22.1% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 7.1% | 13.4% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.0% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 78.9% | 79.4% | 79.4% | typical |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
48.5% 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 28 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.33 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 55% 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 | 48.5%CMS range 33.3–61.4 | 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 | 11.1%CMS range 7.5–17.2 | 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 95.8% | 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 | 8.3% | 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.93 | 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 60 beds and averages 56.9 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 3 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 3.55 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.68 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.94 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 3.09 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.73 on weekdays — 17% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.84 to 0.28 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 54% 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.
40 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 28 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · Lcited before2024-03-13 · 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, record review and staff interview the facility failed to ensure food was stored and prepared in a manner to prevent the spread of food borne illnesses. The facility failed to ensure food served from the kitchen was cooked thoroughly to an adequate temperature before serving it to residents. In addition, the facility failed to ensure the kitchen was clean and food was stored in the kitchen in a safe and sanitary manner. There were multiple items which were either not labeled or remained available for service past use by dates. Ensuring all food is cooked to an adequate temperature is critical to prevent the spread of food borne illnesses. The state agency found the failure to cook food items to the appropriate temperature placed all 55 residents currently residing in the facility in an immediate jeopardy (IJ) situation. At which time serious harm and/or death could occur immediately if the facility did not correct this failure. The facility was notified of the IJ at 3:43 PM on 03/12/24. The SA accepted the plan of correction (POC) at 5:30 PM on 03/12/24. On…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Actual harm · G2024-08-22 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — isolatedImplement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
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 implement their antibiotic stewardship program. Resident #44's attending physician received the urine culture results which indicated the resident's infection was resistant to Macrobid. However, the physician ordered Macrobid to treat the urinary tract infection (UTI). The resident did not improve and when questioned the facility reviewed the culture again and discovered the wrong antibiotic was ordered. This resulted in actual harm for Resident #44. Her UTI symptoms persisted and she was later hospitalized with sepsis. This was discovered during the completion of the infection control task during the long term care survey process. Resident Identifier: #44 Facility Census: 56 Findings Included: a) Resident #44 On 08/21/24 a record review found Resident #44 had a urinalysis and culture and sensitivity performed on a urine sample collected at the facility on 04/11/24. On 04/15/24 at 6:03 PM the urine culture and sensitivity showed the bacteria…
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 F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure accurate Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments. This deficient practice had the potential to affect one (1) of three (3) closed records reviewed during the survey process. Resident Identifier: #60. Facility Census: 57. Findings included:a) Resident #60 Review of Resident #60's discharge return not anticipated Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 01/16/26, coded the resident's discharge destination as a short-term general hospital.According to a nursing note, written on 01/16/26 at 3:28 PM, Resident #60 was discharged home with home health. On 03/10/2026 at 3:05 PM, the Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed Resident #60 was discharged home and the discharge MDS was incorrectly coded regarding discharge destination.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-11 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to revise the resident's comprehensive care plan to reflect the resident's choices of long term care goal. This had the potential to affect one (1) of 30 residents reviewed in the Long-Term Care Survey Process. Resident Identifier: #6. Facility Census: 57. Findings Included:a) On 03/11/26 at 10:15 AM, a document review revealed resident's care plan stated the following: Page one (1), Patient with plans to discharge to home when there is an overall improvement in abilities. Date Initiated: 02/08/19Revision on: 02/08/19 Page 14, Resident has no plans for discharge secondary to long term care placement in the facility. Date Initiated: 08/28/24 Revision: 08/28/24 b) Interview with Social Worker, on 03/11/26 at 10:18 AM, who reported the initial focus should have been resolved but continues to show up on care plan as active. c) Interview with Administrator and Director Of Nursing, at approximately at 10:25 AM on 03/11/26, who acknowledged the care plan had both plans to return to the community and for long-term care on his…
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 F0678 — failed to provide CPR when needed — isolatedProvide basic life support, including CPR, prior to the arrival of emergency medical personnel , subject to physician orders and the resident’s advance directives.
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 honor a resident's Physician's Orders for Scope of Treatment (POST) form indicating the resident did not want cardio-pulmonary resuscitation. This deficient practice had the potential to affect one (1) of one (1) residents reviewed for the closed record category of death. This was determined to be past non-compliance beginning on [DATE] and ending [DATE]. Resident Identifier: #61. Facility Census: 57. Findings Included:a) Resident #61 The facility's policy titled Emergency Procedures, with no implementation or revision dates given, stated cardio-pulmonary resuscitation (CPR) would not be provided for residents having a valid physician order to withhold CPR per the resident's or resident's representative's request. Review of Resident #61's medical records showed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident, who had the capacity to make his own medical decisions, completed a [NAME] Virginia Physician's Orders for Scope 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 before2026-03-11 · 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 observations 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 with regards to resident hand sanitation before meals. This was true for Resident #53 and Resident #6. Facility census: 57. Findings included:a) Lunch Meal on 03/10/26 At 12:12 PM on 03/10/26, the State Agency (SA) observed Nurse Aide #65 passing lunch trays to Resident #53 and Resident #6. Nurse Aide #65 set up trays for both residents, who share the same room, without first offering hand sanitation to either resident. The nurse aide then exited the room and walked back to hallway. At 12:15 PM, the SA interviewed Nurse Aide #65 and inquired if she had provided hand sanitizing care. She replied, Um ., um. The nurse aide then walked over to the cart, grabbed some hand wipes, walked back into resident's room, and asked if they had eaten yet and if they would like to wipe their hands. When she…
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 before2025-07-03 · 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 maintain an infection control program for removal of dirty dishes, old food and drinks from the dining room for Resident #31 and storage of the oxygen cannula and tubing and a soiled bath basin for Resident #47. These were random opportunities for discovery. Resident Identifiers: #31 and #47. Facility Census: 57.Based on observation and staff interview, the facility failed to maintain an infection control program for removal of dirty dishes, old food and drinks from the dining room for Resident #31 and storage of the oxygen cannula and tubing and a soiled bath basin for Resident #47. These were random opportunities for discovery. Resident Identifiers: #31 and #47. Facility Census: 57. Findings Include: a) Resident #31 Upon arrival to facility on 07/01/25 at 3:15 AM, an observation of dirty dishes from the evening meal with old food and drinks which included: tea, milk, macaroni and cheese with bread stuffed into a bowl, which had Resident #31's meal ticket under the dinner plate. Also, a styrofoam cup with lid and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-03 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation and staff interview, the facility failed to provide a dignified experience during activities of daily living (ADL) care for Resident #55. This was a random opportunity for discovery. Resident Identifier: #55. Facility Census: 57. Findings Include: a) Resident #55 On 07/01/25 at 3:25 AM, an observation of Resident #55 sitting in a wheelchair with no shirt on and brief on in front of the bathroom with the door to the hallway was open. Nurse Aide (NA) #15 was emptying the urinary catheter bag. Resident #55 was interview at this time. The resident was asked, are you getting the assistance you need? The resident stated, she is getting my catheter emptied and getting ready to put me on the pot. On 07/01/25 at 3:40 AM, the Director of Nursing (DON) was advised of the observation. The DON confirmed the door to the hallway should have been closed.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-03 · tag F0627 — isolatedEnsure the transfer/discharge meets the resident's needs/preferences and that the resident is prepared for a safe transfer/discharge.
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 complete discharge planning and permit Resident #58 to return to the facility after an acute care transfer. This was true for one (1) of one (1) residents reviewed under the care area of transfers/discharges. Resident identifier: #58. Facility census: 57.Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to complete discharge planning and permit Resident #58 to return to the facility after an acute care transfer. This was true for one (1) of one (1) residents reviewed under the care area of transfers/discharges. Resident Identifier: #58. Facility Census: 57. Findings Include: a) Resident #58 On 07/01/25 at 5:00 AM, a review of a facility-reported incident (FRI) dated 12/27/24 was completed. The review found Resident #58 had been admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident was noted with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14 on 11/29/24. The score of 14 indicates the resident is cognitively intact. The 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 · Dcited before2025-07-03 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to provide an accurate and complete record for Resident #58. This was true for one (1) of nine (9) residents reviewed during the survey process. Resident Identifier: #58. Facility Census: 57. Findings Include: a) Resident #58 On 07/02/25 at 8:40 AM, a record review was completed for Resident #58. The review found the resident had been transferred to an acute care facility on multiple occasions. The transfer form dated 02/02/23 was incorrect and the correct date was 03/26/24. An additional transfer form dated 03/26/24 was incorrect and the correct date was 08/09/24. On 07/02/25 at 8:55 AM, the Director of Nursing (DON) was notified regarding the incorrect dates on the transfer forms. The DON confirmed the dates were incorrect. The DON stated, sometimes the nurses get in a hurry and do not review the transfer form dates.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-03 · tag F0907 — isolatedProvide enough space and equipment to meet each resident's needs
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation and staff interview the facility failed to ensure hallways were free from clutter and allowed resident a direct access down the hallway. This was a random opportunity for discovery and had the potential to affect a minimal number of residents residing in the Long-Term Care Facility. Facility census: 57 Findings include:During the initial our of the facility on 07/01/25 at 3:20 AM surveyor observed wheelchairs, geri chairs, and mechanical lifts parked on the right side of the hall along with a large portable Air Conditioning unit. On the left side of the hall was a linen cart and a geri chair, this blocking a direct path up or down the hallway.On 07/01/25 at 3:30 AM Licensed Practical Nurse ( LPN) #7 confirmed the hall did not have a direct path for residents to easily get through.
- Potential for harm · F2024-08-22 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — widespreadDispose of garbage and refuse properly.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation and staff interview the facility failed to dispose of garbage and refuse properly by not ensuring the lid on the dumpster was closed. This was found while completing the facility task of the Kitchen and has the potential to affect all residents currently residing in the facility. Resident Census: 56. Findings include: a) Dumpster An observation of the facility's dumpster on 08/21/24 at 1:40 PM with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) present found the lid to the dumpster was opened. When looking into the dumpster it was noted there was a bag trash inside the dumpster. The NHA confirmed the dumpster lid should have been closed.
Show the remaining 28 citations
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-08-22 · 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 ensure the safe food handling practices was used. A glass was held barehanded by the rim during mixing for a thickened diet. This was a random opportunity for discovery identified during the long term care survey process and had the potential to affect a limited number of residents. Facility Census: 56. Findings include: a) Thickened drink. On 08/20/24 at 08:15 AM during an observation of the dining room breakfast prep it was observed that Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #45 was mixing thickened juice drink for a resident. It was further observed that CNA #45 was holding the glass with her bare hand. She had placed her pointer finger and thumb on the top rim of the glass as she stirred the liquid with the opposite hand. When asked if the resident would be drinking from the rim of the glass she stated yes and that she would re-mix another drink. During an interview with the Clinical Manager Registered Nurse (CM RN) #12 on 08/20/24 at approximately 8:19 AM, CM RN #12 stated that the CNA's know better than that and CM RN…
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 · D2024-08-22 · 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 medical record review and staff interview the facility failed to formulate an advance directive by not obtaining the signature of the Medical Power of Attorney. This was true for one (1) of four (4) residents whose advanced directives were reviewed during the long term care survey process. Resident identifier: Resident #10. Facility Census: 56. Findings include: a) Resident #10 During a medical record review on 08/19/24 at 2:33 PM a review of the [NAME] Virginia Physician Order for Scope of Treatment (WV POST) form for Resident #10 it was identified the facility obtained a verbal confirmation of agreement from the residents Medical Power of Attorney (MPOA) on 06/09/22. It is further identified the signature of the MPOA had not been obtained. In review of the WV Post Using the Post Form Guidance for Health Care Professionals it is identified on page 20 the verbal confirmation of agreement from the patient's MPOA representative can be obtained and the form should then be signed at the earliest available opportunity. During an interview with the Assistant Director of Nursing…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-22 · 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 observation and staff interview the facility failed to provide a homelike environment. This was true for two (2) of fifty-six (56) residents observed during the long term care survey process. Resident Identifiers: #21, #112 Facility Census: 56 Findings include: a) Resident #21 On 08/19/24 at 9:23 AM observation of Resident #21's wardrobe found the face of the drawer in the bottom of the wardrobe was missing. This was confirmed with Registered Nurse Unit Manager #76 on 08/19/24 at 9:45 AM. b) Resident #112 On 08/19/24 at 9:23 AM observation of Resident #112's room found there were three (3) curtain hooks missing from the privacy curtain between the entrance door and the bed. This caused the curtain to hang down on one corner. This was confirmed with the Registered Nurse Unit Manager #76 on 08/19/24 at 9:45 AM.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-22 · 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 a review of the facility policy and procedure for Abuse, Neglect and Misappropriation, facility record review, medical record review and staff interview the facility failed to implement and ensure actions were in place to prevent further potential abuse. This was a random opportunity of discovery during the long term care survey process. This had the ability to affect a limited number of residents. Resident Identifier: Resident #34. Facility Census: 56. Findings include: a) Resident #34 During a review of the facility policy and procedure for Abuse, Neglect and Misappropriation it was identified on page 6 (six) of 20, (written as typed); In the event an allegation is made, the facility will take measures to protect residents from harm during an investigation. Accurate and timely reporting of incidents, both alleged and substantiated, will be sent to officials in accordance with the state law. If the alleged violation is verified, appropriate corrective actions will be taken by the facility. On 08/21/24 at approximately 10:30 AM during a facility record review of a facility…
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 · D2024-08-22 · 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 record review and staff interview, the facility failed to report an alleged incident of resident to resident abuse involving Resident #3 and an unknown resident. This was true for one (1) of three (3) residents reviewed for abuse during the survey process. Resident identifier: #3. Facility census: 56. Findings include: a) Resident #3 At approximately 2:15 PM on 08/20/24, a review of Resident #3's progress notes was conducted, related to behaviors the resident exhibited. It was noted on 03/18/24, Resident #3 was witnessed throwing a cup of water in the face of another resident who was not identified. Upon review of the incidents and reportables logs supplied by the facility, it was determined the incident was not listed on either log. At approximately 3:15 PM on 08/20/24, a copy of the reportable incident and investigation, if available, was requested from the Administrator. At approximately 3:45 PM, the Administrator confirmed the incident was not reported and an investigation was not started. Review of Resident #3's care plan discovered a note under the focus area…
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 before2024-08-22 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY . Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to accurately complete the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment for Resident #60 upon discharge. This was true for one (1) of one (1) residents reviewed for discharge during the survey process. Resident identifier: 60. Facility census: 56. Findings include: a) Resident #60 At approximately 9:15 AM on 08/20/24, during a record review for Resident #60, the following note, entered by the Social Worker (SW) was discovered (typed as written): 7/1/24 14:56 Social Services Note: Note Text: (Resident #60's name)'s family would like (Resident #60's name) to discharge on [DATE] related to progress made on goals. They plan on picking her up sometime after 4:00p.m. No equipment needs. Home health will be arranged with (Home Health Provider). Per daughters the family all take turns staying with (Resident #60's name) and she has 24 hour care at home. According to the discharge summary provided by the facility, Resident #60 was discharged home on [DATE]. Upon…
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 · D2024-08-22 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY . Based on medical record review and staff interview the facility failed to update the [NAME] Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources Pre-admission Screening (PASARR) with new qualifying diagnoses of major depressive disorder. This was true for two (2) of three (3) residents whose PASSARR's were reviewed during the long term survey process. Residents identifiers: #34, #39. Facility Census: 56. Findings included: a) Resident # 34 During a medical record review [NAME] Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources Pre-admission Screening (PASSARR) on 08/21/24 at 12:00 PM, it was identified the PASSARR was completed on 11/25/22. During a further medical record review it was identified on 03/20/24 the resident was diagnosed with Major Depressive disorder. An updated PASSARR could not be found for this new diagnosis. During an interview with the Social Worker (SW) #77 on 08/21/24 at 12:21 PM, SW #77 agreed that the PASSARR should have been updated at the time of the new diagnosis of major depressive…
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 · D2024-08-22 · 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 interview the facility failed to ensure a Preadmission Screening and Review (PASARR) form had the appropriate diagnoses present. This was true for one (1) of three (3)PASSr's reviewed during the long term care survey process. Resident Identifier: #20 Facility Census: 56 Findings Include: a) Resident #20 On 08/20/24 at 10:29 AM record review of the transfer PASARR provided by Social Worker #77, dated 04/15/24 found that the only diagnosis listed was dementia. A review of Resident #20 medical diagnosis found the following diagnosis: Dementia, upon admission Bipolar, upon admission Depression, upon admission Generalized Anxiety Disorder, upon admission On 08/20/24 at 3:10 PM this was confirmed with Social Worker #77 who agreed all the listed diagnosis should be on the PASARR.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-22 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, family interview, observation and staff interview the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for Resident #44 related to diet restrictions associated with a medical condition. This was true for one (1) of four (4) residents reviewed for the care area of nutrition during the long term care survey process. Resident Identifier: # 44. Facility Census: 56. Findings Include: a) Resident #44 Observation of the noon time meal on 08/21/24 at 12:47 PM found Resident #44 was sitting in the dining room. She was served her meal and on her plate was a serving of corn. Resident #44 immediately stated, I can not eat corn, they know that. She then pushed her plate to the side. A few minutes later Resident #44's family member entered the dining room and said, oh we can just take that corn off your plate. She then helped Resident #44 remove the corn from her plate. An interview with Resident #44's family at this time found, the facility always gives her stuff she should not eat due to her ileostomy. A review of Resident #44's tray ticket found she was supposed 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 · Dcited before2024-08-22 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to revise the comprehensive care plan in a timely manner. Revisions required for new diagnosis and medication changes. This was true for three (3) of twenty three (23) residents reviewed during the long-term care survey process. Resident Identifier: Resident #34, Resident #14 and Resident #24. Facility Census: 56. Findings Include: a) Resident #34 During a medical record review 08/21/24 at approximately 12:21 PM, it was found Resident #34 diagnosis includes a diagnosis of major depression disorder with the onset date of 03/20/24. Further review of the residents care plan the diagnosis of major depression disorder is not identified. During an interview with the Director or Nursing (DON) on 08/21/24 at 1:29 PM the DON stated the comprehensive care plan had not been revised to reflect the diagnosis of major depression disorder with the onset date of 03/20/24. b) Resident #14 On 08/20/24 at 2:24 PM a record review found that Resident #14 was care planned for antipsychotic medications and listed Seroquel related 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 · Dcited before2024-08-22 · 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 act on a Physician's order which caused a delay in treatment. This was true for one (1) of twenty three (23) resident records reviewed during the long term care survey process. Resident Identifier: #53 Facility Census: 56 Findings Include: a) Resident #53 On 08/20/24 record review found Resident #53 had an active order dated 07/26/24 to hemoccult stools (a screening test that checks for hidden blood in stool) X 3 samples for an abnormal lab result. As of 08/20/24 the staff had only obtained one stool sample. The one sample which was retrieved on 08/17/24 returned with a positive result for blood being present. Upon notifying the off hours physician (Never Alone) new orders were received to continue monitoring. Resident to also follow up with in house physician for a possible Gastrointestinal (GI) referral. There was no documentation to show the in house physician had been notified. There were no stool samples retrieved after 08/17/24. On 08/20/24 at 3:34 PM when it was discussed with the Director of Nursing it took…
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 before2024-08-22 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — isolatedProvide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure sufficient nursing staff was deployed to meet the needs of each resident. This was a random opportunity for discovery. Resident identifiers: #44, #34. Facility census: 56. Findings include: A) Resident #44 At approximately 1:30 PM on 08/20/24, during resident council, Resident #44 stated they rang their call light last night (08/19/24) at approximately 4:20 AM. Resident #44 stated her light was finally answered at approximately 5:00 AM, at which time, the employee who answered the light stated staff was unable to answer the call light earlier because her assigned aide had been pulled to do one on one (1:1) care with Resident #34. At approximately 10:00 AM on 08/21/24, an interview was conducted with Resident #44. During the interview, the resident stated, I waited from about 4:20 in the morning until a little after 5:00 in the morning for someone to answer my light. When the aide finally answered my light, she told me the aide that was assigned to me at the beginning of the evening couldn't…
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 · D2024-08-22 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY . Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to monitor Resident #3 for side effects of antianxiety, antidepressant, and mood stabilizing medications as ordered, as well as monitoring for behaviors as ordered, per shift. This was true for one (1) of one (1) residents reviewed for psych/opioid side effects during the survey process. Resident identifier: #3. Facility census: 56. Findings include: a) Resident #3 At approximately 11:00 AM on 08/19/2024, a record review was conducted concerning side effects of psychotropic medications and opioids for Resident #3. During the review, it was noted Resident #3 had the following orders (typed as written): ANTIANXIETY side effect monitoring but not limited to: Dystonia: torticollis(stiffness of neck), Anticholinegic symptoms: Dry mouth, blurred vision, constipation, urinary retention. Hypotension, Sedation/drowsiness, increased falls/dizziness, Cardiac abnormalities (tachycardia, bradycardia, irregular H.R;NMS). Anxiety/agitation, blurred vision,…
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 · D2024-08-22 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
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 significant medication errors did not occur. This was a random opportunity for discovery. Resident identifier: #43 Facility Census: #56 Findings included: a) Resident #43 On 08/20/24 at 9:52 AM a record review found Resident #43 had a medication error on 08/12/24 at 1:41 PM . Further review of the Record found Resident #43 had the following medications ordered: Atorvastatin 40 mg at bedtime (for hyperlipidemia) Buspirone 30 mg twice a day (for anxiety and depression) Colestid 1 gram two times a day (for diarrhea) Dicyclomine 10 mg three times a day (for diarrhea) Empagliflozin 10 mg daily (for diabetes) Loratadine 10 mg daily (for allergies) Losartan Potassium 50 mg daily (for hypertension) Magnesium Oxide 400 mg twice a day (for supplement) Metformin 1000 mg twice a day( for diabetes) Metoprolol Succinate ER 25 mg daily (for hypertension) Omeprazole 20 mg daily (for GERD) Remeron 15 mg at bedtime (for insomnia) Sertraline 100 mg twice a day(for depression) Tylenol 500 mg every 6 hours as needed (for pain)…
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 · D2024-08-22 · tag F0800 — isolatedProvide each resident with a nourishing, palatable, well-balanced diet that meets his or her daily nutritional and special dietary needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, observation, family interview and staff interview the facility failed to provide Resident #44 with a diet that met her special dietary needs related to her ileostomy. This was true for one (1) of four (4) residents reviewed for the care area of nutrition during the long term care survey process. Resident Identifier: 44. Facility Census: 56. Findings Include: a) Resident #44 Observation of the noon time meal on 08/21/24 at 12:47 PM found Resident #44 was sitting in the dining room. She was served her meal and on her plate was a serving of corn. Resident #44 immediately stated, I can not eat corn they know that. She then pushed her plate to the side. A few minutes later Resident #44's family member entered the dining room and said, oh we can just take that corn off your plate. She then helped Resident #44 remove the corn from her plate. An interview with Resident #44's family at this time found, the facility always gives her stuff she should not eat due to her ileostomy. A review of Resident #44's tray ticket found she was supposed to be served the alternate…
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 before2024-08-22 · 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 medical record review and staff interview the facility failed to accurately document the discharge of a resident and the facility failed to accurately complete a residents capacity form. This was true for two (2) of 23 residents reviewed during the long term care survey process. Resident Identifiers: Resident #5, and #35. Census: 56. a) Resident #59 During a review of the medical record review of 08/20/24 at 9:09 AM of Resident #59 a Social Service note identified the resident had went on a therapeutic leave with his daughter. It was further identified the daughter notified the facility he would not be returning to the facility. During this medical record review a physician note entry for the discharge to family could not be identified. Further review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] it is identified under section A, under (f) the resident had discharged and was not expected to return it is further identified under (g) the discharge was unplanned. During an interview with the Director 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 · D2024-08-22 · tag F0847 — isolatedInform resident or representatives choice to enter into binding arbitration agreement and right to refuse.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and resident interview, the facility failed to ensure residents entering into a binding arbitration agreement were able to understand the agreement prior to signing. This was true for two (2) of two (2) residents reviewed for arbitration during the survey process. Facility Census: 56. Findings include: A) Arbitration Agreements At approximately 9:20 AM on 08/22/24, a list of residents entering into the facility's binding arbitration agreement was reviewed. It was determined Residents #112 and Resident #34 were the only two (2) residents in the facility who signed the agreement. At approximately 9:30 AM on 08/22/24, an interview was conducted with Resident #112 regarding the arbitration agreement. Resident #112 stated, I don't recall signing anything like that. They brought something in here the day after I got here and had me sign it, but I don't know what it was I even signed. I signed so many things when I got here. The arbitration agreement was explained to Resident #112 and she stated I don't remember anything like that. They just handed me papers and told…
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 before2024-06-12 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — widespreadProvide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, and resident and staff interview, the facility failed to have sufficient nursing staff available to meet the needs of each resident residing in the facility. This was true for three (3) of three (3) residents interviewed during the survey process, as well as resident council members. This had the potential to affect more than a limited number of residents. Resident identifiers: #8, #32, #36, #41, #52. Facility census: 60. Findings include a) Resident #8 At approximately 10:05 AM on 06/10/24, an interview was conducted with Resident #8. During the interview, Resident #8 stated, There have been several times that I have needed up, or needed changed, and I was told it was going to be a while because they were working short. There are a lot of days they will say 'We just don't have enough people ' and you will have to wait a long time on your light to be answered, or if they answer it, they'll say, 'We will be right back' but they never come back. b) Resident #52 At approximately 10:13 AM on 06/10/24, an interview was conducted with Resident #52.…
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 · E2024-06-12 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — patternProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on resident and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure each resident received proper hydration due to no water being passed to Resident #52 and other residents present during a resident council meeting. This was a random opportunity for discovery. This has the potential to affect more than a limited number of residents. Resident identifiers: #52, #7, #32, #36, #41, #48, #54. Facility census: 60. Findings include: a) Resident #52 At approximately 10:13 AM on 06/10/24, an interview was conducted with Resident #52. During the interview, Resident #52 stated she did not feel the facility had enough staff because the water pass was so inconsistent. Resident #52 stated, I didn't get any water last night and kept asking for it. They told me 'We are getting it now ' but they would never come back with water. That happens a lot. There are times that I get nauseous and would like some cold water, but I don't always have it. They are supposed to pass it at seven in the morning and seven in the evening, but that rarely happens, they just don't pass it at night. Resident #52 said,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-03-13 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure 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 resident environment over which it had control was as free from accident hazards as possible. The facility failed to ensure the door to the janitor's closet located in the dining room remained locked. This failed practice had the potential to affect more than an isolated number of residents currently residing in the facility. Facility Census: 55. Findings included: a) An observation of the janitor closet located in the dining room in the afternoon of 03/11/24 found the door was not locked and it could be easily pushed open despite the fact it had an electronic locking keypad. An additional observation on 03/12/24 at 2:30 PM found the door to the janitor closet in the dining room was again not locked. The door could easily be pushed open. An interview with the Maintenance Director at 2:30 PM on 03/12/24 confirmed the door was not locked. He removed the [NAME] and the [NAME] hanger which was hanging on the door. He stated…
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 · D2024-03-13 · 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 record review and staff interview the facility failed to thoroughly investigate an incident of physical abuse between Resident #52 (the victim) and Resident #42 (the perpetrator). The incident occurred on night shift, and the facility failed to obtain statements from staff who were working at the time of the incident. This was a random opportunity for discovery and was true for Resident #52. Resident Identifiers: #52. Facility Census: 55. Findings Include: a) Resident #52 A review of the facility's reportable's for the previous six (6) months found a reportable dated 12/30/23 which reported and incident where Resident #42 entered the room of Resident #52 while he was sleeping. When Resident #52 told Resident #42 that he was in the wrong room Resident #42 began throwing things about the room and struck Resident #52 in the head multiple times. A review of the facility's investigation found there were three (3) statements obtained from staff and they were as follows: Statement from Licensed Practical Nurse (LP) #3 read as follows typed as written: CNA (Certified Nurse 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 · Dcited before2024-03-13 · 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 each resident with the goods and services to enable them to maintain and or attain their highest practicable physical and mental well being. The facility failed to initiate neurological assessments on Resident #52 when another resident reportedly hit him in the head more than once. This was a random opportunity for discovery for Resident #52. Facility Census: 55 Findings included: a) Resident #52 A review of the facility's reportable incidents found a reportable incident dated 12/30/23 at 12:30 PM. The description of the incident indicated Resident #52 was in his room asleep and another resident entered his room and woke him up. When Resident #52 advised the other resident that he was in the wrong room the other resident became agitated and threw items about the room. Resident #52 also stated the other resident then began hitting him in the head several times. A review of Resident #52's medical record found no neurological assessments had been completed after this incident was reported to the staff. An…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2022-10-19 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure 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, facility failed to ensure the resident environment over which it had control was as free from accident hazards as possible. The central supply, clean utility, and dirty utility rooms were found unlocked. This had the potential to affect more than a limited number of residents. Additionally, Resident #39 was observed eating a table decoration. These were random opportunities for discovery. Resident identifier: #39. Facility census: 53. a) unlocked clean and dirty utility rooms On 10/17/22 at 11:17 AM, the clean utility room located in the C hallway was found to be unlocked. The room contained resident hygiene items, including razors. Nursing Assistant #18 verified the clean utility room was unlocked and she locked the door. On 10/17/22 at 11:35 AM, the clean utility room located in the C hallway was again found to be unlocked. The dirty utility room located in C hallway was also found to be unlocked at this time. The dirty utility room contained a container for disposal of needles and other sharp items. Items had been placed in the container.…
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 · D2022-10-19 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolatedKeep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure that resident has the right to personal privacy of not only his or her own physical body, but of his or her personal space. This was true for one (1) of (1) resident reviewed for the care area of privacy during the long term care survey. Resident identifier: #14. Facility census: 53. Findings included: a) Resident #14 On 10/17/22 at 11:35 AM, the resident said she feels that privacy is a concern when her roommate's visitors come into the room during meal times. Sometimes six (6) or seven (7) people come to visit in the room at a time. She said it is an invasion of her personal space and there is no ability to really eat with all of those people in there during meals. She said she likes to eat in her room in her wheelchair. The roommates visitors are pushed up against her when eating and bumping into her at times. She likes her roommate but all the roommates visitors take up her space. On 10/18/22 at 10:08 AM, the Activity Supervisor (AS) #2 stated the roommate of Resident #14 does receive large numbers 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 before2022-10-19 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, observation and staff interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #49's care plan was implemented in the area of accident hazards and fragile skin this was true for one (1) of one (1) residents reviewed for the care area of accident hazards and one (1) of three (3) residents reviewed for skin conditions non pressure related during the long term care survey process. Resident Identifier: #49. Facility Census: 53. Findings Included: a) Resident #49 1) Accident Hazards A review of resident #49's care plan on 10/18/22 found the following care plan focus statement: -- Ms. (Last name of Resident #49) is at risk for falls r/t (related to) Deconditioning, weakness, history of falls, hospice and actual falls. The goal associated with this focus statement read as follows: -- Patient will be free of falls with major injury through the review date. The Interventions associated with this focus statement included: --Non Skid Socks Observations of Resident #49 with the Director of Nursing (DON) and the Registered Nurse Assessment Coordinator (RNAC) at 2:03 PM on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-10-19 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY . Based or resident interview, staff interview, and record review, the facility failed to include the resident in the care plan meetings and/or provide an explanation in the resident's medical record as to why the participation of the resident was determined not practicable for the development of the resident's care plan. This was true for one (1) of one (1) resident reviewed for participation in care plan during the long -term care survey process. Resident identifier: 34. Facility census: 53. Findings included: a) Resident #34 On 10/17/22 at 11:10 AM, the resident said she had never attended a care plan. When asked if she would like to attend a care plan the resident said, yes. Review of the most recent Minimum Data Set (MDS), a quarterly with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 09/08/22 revealed the resident scored a 12 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS.) A score of 8 to 12 indicates moderately impaired judgement. Record review found the following quarterly notes related to the care plan…
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 · D2022-10-19 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation, resident interview and staff interview the facility failed to ensure respiratory services were being provided in accordance with professional standards of practice. This was true for one (1) of one (1) residents reviewed for respiratory care. Resident identifier: #50. Facility census: 53. Findings included: a) Resident #50 During an observation on 10/17/22 at 1:01 PM, it was noted the mask for Resident #50's continuous airway pressure (CPAP) machine was laying on the night stand and not stored properly in a plastic bag to keep it clean. In an interview with Resident #50 on 10/17/22 at 1:11 PM, the resident reported she has never received a plastic bag to store her mask in, when not in use. During an observation on 10/18/22 at 3:20 PM, it was noted there was still no plastic bag to store Resident #50's CPAP mask in. An interview with the Director of Nursing on 10/17/22 at 3:25 PM, verified there should be a plastic bag at bedside to store Resident #50's Trilogy CPAP mask in, when not in use. .
- Potential for harm · D2022-10-19 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure medications were stored in accordance with currently accepted professional principles. A multi-use medication vial stored in the medication preparation room had not been discarded after opening in the time frame recommended by the manufacturer. This was a discovery during the facility task of medication storage. Facility census: 53. Findings included: a) Medication preparation room During investigation of the medication preparation room on 10/18/22 at 8:40 AM, a multi-dose vial of tuberculin purified protein derivative (PPD) stored in the room refrigerator was noted to have an opening date of 09/01/22. Tuberculin purified protein derivative is given by injection to aid in the diagnosis of tuberculosis. Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #36 stated she did not know how long a tuberculin PPD vial could be used after opening. The vial package insert was reviewed and showed vials in use for more than 30 days should be discarded. LPN #36 verified the tuberculin vial with date of opening 09/01/22 was past…
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
$46,232 in federal fines across 2 penalties.
- $13,637 — penalty dated 2024-07-06
- $32,595 — penalty dated 2024-03-13
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 COMMUNICARE HEALTH — 110 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 | 4 of 5 | 3.2 | +0.8 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 2.7 | +0.3 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 2.6 | +0.4 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.5 | +0.5 vs chain |
The other 109 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.2★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 109; 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ZENITH HOLDINGS OP CO., LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 04/14/2023 |
| C.R. STOLTZ FAMILY INVESTMENT COMPANY INC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/14/2023 |
| C.R. STOLTZ IRREVOCABLE TRUST | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/14/2023 |
| HEALTH CARE HOLDINGS, LLC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/14/2023 |
| I. ROSEDALE FAMILY INVESTMENT COMPANY INC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/14/2023 |
| I. ROSEDALE IRREVOCABLE TRUST | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/14/2023 |
| MARANTZ WV HOLDINGS, LLC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/14/2023 |
| R.S. WILHEIM IRREVOCABLE TRUST | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/14/2023 |
| RONALD S WILHEIM 2012 SPOUSAL TRUST | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/14/2023 |
| ROSEDALE FAMILY INVESTMENT COMPANY, INC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/14/2023 |
| RRW, LLC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/14/2023 |
| WILHEIM FAMILY INVESTMENT COMPANY, INC. | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/14/2023 |
| ZENITH HEALTHCARE HOLDINGS, LLC | Organization | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/14/2023 |
| ROMEO, DOMINIC | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 04/14/2023 |
| STOLTZ, CHARLES | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 04/14/2023 |
| WILHEIM, RONALD | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 04/14/2023 |
| HRESAN MGT. CO., LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/14/2023 |
| ANTOLINI, MICHAEL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/08/2025 |
| COOPER, STACY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/08/2025 |
| GROVES, DONNA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 04/14/2023 |
| ODENTHAL, RICHARD | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/03/2025 |
| S.L. ROSEDALE IRREVOCABLE TRUST | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/14/2023 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 38 rows in the source record cover these 22 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
15 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 90% 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 $1.9M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 32% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
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 515153. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-03-11, 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.