Kingwood Healthcare Center
300 Miller Road, Kingwood, WV 26537 · For profit - Corporation · 120 certified beds · (304) 329-3195 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (38) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 1 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 2 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 12.0% | 14.7% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 6.3% | 6.3% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.7% | 0.4% | 0.9% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 1.6% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 2.5% | 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 | 2.8% | 4.4% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 10.2% | 15.9% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 22.3% | 27.0% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 95.7% | 97.6% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 0.9% | 4.2% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 24.2% | 22.1% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 7.8% | 13.4% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.8% | 1.0% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 70.8% | 79.4% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 41.5% | 22.5% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 11.3% | 11.3% | 12.0% | typical |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.58 | 1.80 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 2.92 | 1.84 | 1.80 | worse |
‡ 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.
41.2% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that worse than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 83 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 44.4% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 27 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.19 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 21% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 4% 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 | 41.2%CMS range 31.5–49.9 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | worse than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 11.2%CMS range 7.6–15.7 | 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 | 44.4% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 55.6% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 29.6% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 97.9% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 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 | 2.1% | 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 | 4.2% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 6.2%CMS range 3.1–11.0 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.02 | 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 120 beds and averages 116.3 residents a day — about 97% occupied, or roughly 4 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. 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 3.21 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.62 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.79 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 2.83 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.36 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.73 to 0.36 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 45% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 3 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are 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.
38 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 28 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-05-14 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations and staff interviews, the facility failed to maintain a clean, safe and comfortable homelike environment for the residents. The surveyors observed various maintenance issues and items requiring cleaning. Resident identifiers: #7, #29, #50, and #111. Census: 116. Findings include: a) On May 11, 2026 at approximately 11:45 AM during a routine walkthrough of the 300 hallway, the following was observed: A high-back wheelchair near 301 had brown stains, was visibly soiled, and showed cracks and splitting of the vinyl. Nurse Aide #116 said, Housekeeping cleans them on a schedule usually. when asked who cleans and maintains the wheelchairs. Observation revealed the sit to-stand (STS) lift at the end of the hall (300) near rehab had a sling draped across it. Interview with CNA #116 they are not supposed to be stored on the lifts, there is a space at the end of the hallways. Wall paper is torn and peeling off the wall near rehab at end of 300 hall During an interview with Nurse Aide (NA) #116 the NA said, That's been that way a while. b) Resident #50 Resident #50 has…
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 before2026-05-14 · 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 items for resident meal use are air dried prior to use. This was found during the annual facility survey process. This failed practice had the potential to affect more than a limited number of residents. Facility census 116.Findings include: a) Policy review for ware washing included the following: Policy statement: All dishware, service ware, and utensils will be cleaned and sanitized after each use.Procedures read in part:4. All dishware will be air dried and properly stored. During the initial walk-through on 05/11/26 at around 11:30 AM with the Food Service Director in the dish tank area: wet nesting was observed with four (4) of four (4) Kennedy cups and eight (8) of twelve (12) cereal bowls. Food Service Manager verified these items remained wet During the follow-up kitchen observation with the Food Service Director on 05/12/2026 at around 10:30 AM, wet nesting was observed again in the dish tank area. Ten (10) of twelve (12) cereal bowls were placed in a bus tub, stacked on each other. The Manager…
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 before2026-05-14 · 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 record review, observation and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure a safe and sanitary environment was provided to prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. This failed practice had the potential to affect more than a limited number of residents. Resident identifiers: #3, #111. Facility Census: 116. a) Resident #111 On 05/11/26 at 11:19 AM, during an interview with Resident # 111, staff observed a hole in the bottom edge of his walker seat's plastic cover, exposing the inner padding. During a facility walkthrough with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON), on 05/12/26 at 1:55 PM, she acknowledged Resident #111's walker seat with the hole and exposed inner padding and stated she would report it so the seat cover could be repaired. b) On 05/11/2026 at around 2:15 PM the surveyor observed two resident ice packs with names on them in the freezer in the nourishment room on the 300 hall. The surveyor also observed residents' personal food items (ice cream, frozen foods) in the freezer. A reminder notice hanging on the side 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 · D2026-05-14 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, observation, staff interview and resident interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident's call light was within reach. This failed practice had the potential to affect a limited number of residents. Resident Identifier: #117. Facility Census: 116.Findings included:a) Resident #117The facility's policy and procedure for Resident Rights stated, c. To have a method to communicate needs to staff. i. Call light or bell access will be within reach of the resident as one method to communicate needs to staff. On 05/12/26 at 11:20 AM, during an interview with Resident #117, he was reaching around his bed looking for something. I asked him if he was looking for his call light, and he stated, No, but it is hanging up there, I don't know why they put it up there. Resident #117 was referring to his call light hanging on his over-the-bed light, which was located behind and above his bed.Registered Nurse (RN) #96 entered the room with Resident #117's lunch meal tray. I asked her if she thought Resident #117 could reach his call light? She stated, No, he can't. Then…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-05-14 · tag F0791 — failed to provide routine dental services — isolatedProvide or obtain dental services for each resident.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, and staff interview the facility failed to provide dental services for Resident #110. Resident Identifier #110. Facility Census 116.Findings include:a) Resident #110 On 05/11/2026 at 3:08 PM, during initial interview with Resident #110, she had concerns about having a dental appointment for dentures. Review of records and staff interviews showed her last dental appointment was scheduled for 01/23/25. It was documented that Resident #110 was sick and did not attend the appointment. The appointment was never rescheduled. Assistant Director of Nursing verified this appointment was not rescheduled on 05/13/26 at 11:10 AM.
- Potential for harm · F2024-11-07 · 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 interviews, the facility failed to store garbage and refuse in a proper manner to prevent rodents, vermin and pests. The dumpsters were in disrepair. This had the potential to affect all residents that reside in the facility. Facility census: 117. Findings included: a) Dumpsters On 10/05/24 at 1:47 PM an observation of the dumpsters found one (1) dumpster with a rusty hole in the bottom front with debris hanging out. Dumpster two (2) was in disrepair as the middle doors were unable to close properly do to damage. On 10/05/24 at 1:50 PM during an Interview the Maintenance Director stated that he was aware of the issues with the dumpsters. He continued to say that he has got quotes for new dumpsters, but the facility has not purchased them at this time.
- Potential for harm · E2024-11-07 · tag F0552 — patternEnsure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
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 reviw and staff interview, the facility failed to keep a resident's Health Care Surrogate / legal decision-maker informed of her health status and medical condition. The deficient practice prevented the legal decision-maker from being informed, in advance, of the care to be furnished. This was true for one (1) of 24 residents reviewed in the Long-Term Care Survey Process. Resident identifier: #74. Facility census: 117. Findings included: a) Resident #74 An electronic medical record review, conducted on 11/05/24 at 9:10 PM, revealed: -Resident #74 had been admitted to the hospital on [DATE]. -During Resident #74's stay in the hospital, it was determined that the resident did not have the capacity to make medical decisions, and a Health Care Surrogate (HCS) was appointed to be the legal decision maker on Resident #74's behalf. -The hospital's 07/18/24 After Visit Summary stated that a surrogate decision-maker had been recorded during resident's hospitalization. Details of the After Visit Summary…
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 before2024-11-07 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, with housekeeping, and maintenance services necessary to maintain a sanitary, orderly, and comfortable interior. This was a random opportunity for discovery. Bathroom identifiers: room [ROOM NUMBER], #114, #107, #112. Resident identifier: #94. Facility Census: 117 Findings include: a) room [ROOM NUMBER]: During an inspection of the bathroom in room [ROOM NUMBER] on 11/07/24 at approximately 10:17 AM, a brown substance was observed between the tiles near the commode. room [ROOM NUMBER]: During an inspection of the bathroom in room [ROOM NUMBER] at approximately 10:20 AM on November 7, 2024, a brown substance was observed on the tiles around the toilet. Additionally, sections of the baseboard under the sink were missing, and the drywall in that area needed repair and repainting. During an inspection on 11/07/24 at approximately 9:35 AM the following resident rooms were noted to have the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-11-07 · tag F0623 — patternProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a written Notice of Transfer / Discharge was provided to residents/resident representatives for four (4) of five (5) residents reviewed for hospitalizations during the long-term care survey process. This had the potential to affect all residents being transferred or discharged . Resident identifier: #167, #74, and #28. Facility census: 117. Findings included: a) Resident #167 A medical record review was completed on 11/05/24 at 8:42 PM. The record review revealed Resident #167 was transferred to the hospital on [DATE]. The record did not reflect the resident/resident's representative was provided with a written Notice of Transfer/Discharge indicating the reason for transfer, the effective date of transfer, the location to which the resident was being transferred, and a statement of the resident's appeal rights. During an interview on 11/07/24 at 9:05 AM, the Director of Nursing (DON) reported the facility could produce no evidence…
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 · E2024-11-07 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — patternProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to follow physician orders related to insulin. This was true for one (1) of five (5) residents reviewed for the unnecessary medication review during the annual long-term care survey process. Resident identifier: #56. Facility census: 117. Findings included: a) Resident #56 A record review was completed on 11/05/24 at 6:15 PM. The record review demonstrated that Resident #56 had a diagnosis of diabetes mellitus and had a sliding scale order for insulin. The term sliding scale refers to the progressive increase in the pre-meal or nighttime insulin dose, based on pre-defined blood glucose ranges. Sliding scale insulin regimens approximate daily insulin requirements. The order stated to call the physician if the resident's blood glucose level went above 400. There was no evidence in the electronic medical record that the physician had been notified of a blood glucose level above 400 on the following dates: -05/07/24 at 8:00 PM, Blood Sugar (BS) of 449 -05/08/24 at 8:00 PM, BS of 402 -05/13/24 at 8:00 PM, BS of 404…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 28 citations
- Potential for harm · E2024-11-07 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — patternProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Following record review and interviews, the facility failed to obtain an order to utilize a pain scale for the administration of pain medication. Additionally, facility staff did not assess residents after administering pain medication, to ensure effective pain management, as per professional standards of practice. This failed practice had the potential to affect more than a limited number of residents. Resident identifiers: #103 and #319. Facility census: 117. Findings included: a) Resident #103: Record review, and interview, revealed that Resident #103 had been prescribed the following medication: Tylenol Oral Tablet 325 MG X2 every 6 hours as needed for pain. Order date 08/11/24 at 11:13 AM. Record review conducted on 11/05/24, at approximately 10:00 AM revealed that a pain scale had not been prescribed for the administration of medication. Staff administered medication even when the resident's pain level was recorded as zero (0). Additionally, there were no documented assessments of post-administration pain levels available for review, to evaluate the effectiveness of 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 · E2024-11-07 · tag F0730 — patternObserve each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to complete annual performance reviews for Nurse Aides (NA). This was true for five (5) of five (5) reviewed for staffing during the Long-Term Survey Process (LTCSP). Facility census: 117. Findings included: a) Facility NA's Annual Evaluations A facility record review revealed NA #29, NA #34, NA #60, NA #14, and NA #18 did not receive their 12-month evaluation. During an interview, on 11/06/24 at 4:04 PM, the Human Resource Manager confirmed there were no annual evaluations completed for NA #29, NA #34, NA #60, NA #14, and NA #18. She stated that NA evaluations were something the facility was working on getting completed.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-11-07 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — patternEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the physician documented the actions or rational if no action taken to monthly drug regimen reviews. This was true for four (4) of five (5) reviewed for unnecessary medications and the pharmacist failed to identify clinically significant risks associated with concurrent use of a Benzodiazepines and opioids. Resident identifiers: #22, #77, #101 and #17. Facility census: 117. Findings included: a) Resident #22 Record review of the facility's policy titled, Medication Regimen Review, showed: -Attending Physician Responsibilities: 1. The resident's attending physician must document in the medical record that the identified irregularity has been reviewed, and what if any action has been taken to address it. 2. If there is to be no change in the medications, the attending physician must document his/her rationale in the resident's medical record. A medical record review for Resident #22 revealed monthly drug regimen reviews response without actions or rational if no action taken by the physician. --06/27/24…
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 before2024-11-07 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation and staff interviews, the facility failed to keep unit refrigerators free from medical supplies that could contaminate food and store food and supplies in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. This has the ability to affect more than a limited number of Residents. Facility census: 117. Findings included: a) Unit Pantry's During the initial tour of pantries with the Dietary Manager on 11/04/24 at 11:30 AM an observation of the south pantry found five (5) used resident cold gel Icepacks for injury or surgical procedures stored in the Resident freezer. The continued tour of the north pantry on 11/04/24 at 11:44 AM found five (5) used resident cold gel Icepacks for injury or surgical procedures stored in the Resident freezer and the ice scoop stored in the ice cooler. On 11/04/24 at 12:00 PM during an interview with the Dietary Manager (DM) verified that medical supplies should not be stored in Resident refrigerators or freezers and the ice scoop should be placed in the scoop holder, not in the ice chest.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-11-07 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — patternSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to maintain accurate records on four (4) out of 24 sampled residents in the Long-Term Care Survey Process. Resident identifiers: #71, #68, #110, and #93. Facility census: 117. Findings included: a) Resident #71 A record review, on 11/04/24 at 12:44 PM, revealed a Physician Orders for Scope of Treatment (POST) form in Resident #71's electronic medical record. The POST form was dated 07/30/22. Section E of the POST form, entitled Signature: Patient or Patient Representative/Surrogate/Guardian was unsigned and undated. On 11/05/24 at 2:45 PM, a review of resident's paper chart at nurses' station revealed the original POST was also not signed by resident/resident representative. The directions for completing the POST form, compiled by the [NAME] Virginia Center for End of Life, state, The signature section provides a declaration on behalf of the patient (or incapacitated patient's Medical Power of Attorney representative or health care surrogate) related to their voluntary participation in the completion of the POST form…
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 · D2024-11-07 · tag F0553 — failed to let residents help plan their care — isolatedAllow resident to participate in the development and implementation of his or her person-centered plan of care.
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 facilitate the inclusion of the resident representative in person-centered care planning. This was true for one (1) of 24 residents reviewed in the Long-Term Care Survey Process. Resident identifier: #74. Facility census: 117. Findings included: a) Resident #74 An electronic medical record review, conducted on 11/05/24 at 9:10 PM, revealed: -Resident #74 had been admitted to the hospital on [DATE] -During Resident #74's stay in the hospital, it was determined that the resident did not have the capacity to make medical decisions, and a Health Care Surrogate (HCS) was appointed to be the legal decision maker on Resident #74's behalf. -The hospital's 07/18/24 After Visit Summary clearly stated that a surrogate decision-maker had been recorded during resident's hospitalization. Details of the After Visit Summary were scanned in Resident #74's electronic medical record. However, the HCS form appointing a legal decision maker on Resident #74's behalf…
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 · D2024-11-07 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to notify the resident's legal representative of a change in health status and transfer to the hospital. This failed practice was a random opportunity for discovery and had the potential to affect a limited number of residents. Resident identifier: #74. Facility census: 117. Findings included: a) Resident #74 An electronic medical record review, conducted on 11/05/24 at 9:10 PM, revealed: -A nurses note, dated 07/15/24 at 6:00 PM, stated, Resident transferred to [Name of a local hospital] as direct admit. Transported via facility staff and van. Left facility in stable condition. Resident with capacity. MD (medical doctor) aware. There was no evidence that resident's emergency contact/family member had been notified of the need for acute care or transfer to the hospital. -An eInteract Transfer form, dated 07/15/25 at 8:00 PM, indicated that Resident #74 was her own resident representative and that she was aware of the acute transfer and her clinical situation. During an interview on 11/06/24 at 3:10 PM, the 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 · D2024-11-07 · tag F0582 — isolatedGive residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
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 issue the required Notification of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC) in a timely fashion for one (1) of three (3) residents reviewed for beneficiary protection notification. This failure had the potential to place the resident at risk of not being informed of her rights prior to the end of Medicare Part A covered services. Resident identifier: #269. Facility census: 117. Findings included: a) Beneficiary Notice Review On 11/05/24 at 7:25 PM, a review was completed regarding the beneficiary protection notification liability notice(s) given for Resident #269 who was discharged to home with a family member following his last covered day of Medicare Part A services. Resident #269's last covered day of Part A Services was on 09/05/24. There was no evidence in the electronic medical record that the required Notification of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC) was issued. The Form Instructions for the Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC) CMS-10123 state: The NOMNC must be delivered at least two calendar days before Medicare covered…
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 before2024-11-07 · 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 random observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure a Resident's medical and health information was protected during MDS Interviews. Resident identifiers: #18 and #77. Facility census: 117. Findings included: a) Resident #18 A random observation on 11/04/24 at 1:33 PM, overheard the MDS Licensed Practical Nurse #16 Interviewing Resident #18 from the hallway. The Brief Interview for Mental Status was being assessed. Resident #18's door was open and MDS LPN was speaking loudly. This practice found resident's answers could be overheard by other residents, staff and visitors. b) Resident #77 A random observation on 11/05/24 at 2:38 PM, overheard MDS Licensed Practical Nurse #16 interviewing Resident #77 from the hallway. The Brief Interview for Mental Status was being assessed. Resident #77 was sitting in the MDS open doorway and MDS LPN was speaking loudly. This practice found resident's answers could be overheard by other residents, staff and visitors. On 11/05/24 at 2:40 PM, an interview with the Social Service Director confirmed the information could be…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-11-07 · tag F0622 — isolatedNot transfer or discharge a resident without an adequate reason; and must provide documentation and convey specific information when a resident is transferred or discharged.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the appropriate information was communicated to the receiving health care institution when the facility transferred Resident #167 to the hospital. This deficient practice was true for one (1) of five (5) residents reviewed under the hospitalization pathway. Resident identifier: #167. Facility census: 117. Findings included: a) Resident #167 An electronic medical record review, completed on 11/05/24 at 8:42 PM, reflected that resident was transferred to the hospital on [DATE]. There was no evidence that an eInteract Transfer form had been completed or that the following items had been sent with the resident upon his transfer to the hospital: -Contact information of the practitioner responsible for the care of the resident -Resident representative information including contact information -Advance Directive information -All special instructions or precautions for ongoing care, as appropriate -Comprehensive care plan goals -All other…
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 · D2024-11-07 · tag F0626 — isolatedPermit a resident to return to the nursing home after hospitalization or therapeutic leave that exceeds bed-hold policy.
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, outside agency interview, and staff interview, the facility failed to allow a resident to return to the facility following a brief hospitalization. When the facility did not allow the resident to return, the facility failed to initiate a discharge and did not comply with transfer and discharge requirements at 42 CFR 483.15(c). This was true for one (1) of two (2) residents reviewed under the discharge pathway throughout the survey process. Resident identifier #167. Facility census: 117. Findings included: a) Resident #167 Resident #167 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] as a skilled patient (receiving physical and occupational therapy to help resident regain strength, maximize his independence with activities of daily living, and improve his quality of life following an acute hospitalization.) Resident #167 had the following diagnoses: - Schizoaffective disorder, depressive type. The 2025 edition of the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification…
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 before2024-11-07 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
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 provide physician-ordered treatment and services to a resident admitted with limited range of motion. This deficient practice affected potential one (1) of one (1) residents reviewed for position/mobility. Resident identifier: #1. Facility census: 117. a) Resident #1 Review of Resident #1's progress notes showed a therapy note from 09/30/24 at 5:59 PM that stated, Patient given [NAME] air short opponens orthosis this date to gradually lift flexed digits in R [right] hand. Nurse and aide instructed to keep it on for an hour and then to remove d/t [due to] newness. Patient to wear as tolerated. Review of Resident #1's physicians' orders showed the following order written on 10/01/24, [NAME] air short opponens orthosis to right hand on for an hour and the remove, to wear as tolerated. On 11/06/24 at 9:45 AM Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #10 stated she didn't know if Resident #1 had any devices ordered for his hand. LPN #10 looked at the resident's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-11-07 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure the environment remained as free of accident hazards as is possible and assistance devices to prevent accidents for Resident #101. This was true for one (1) of five (5) residents reviewed for accident hazards. Resident identifier: #101. Facility census: 47. Findings included: a) Resident #101 Review of the nurse's progress notes dated 08/20/24, Resident #101 was sitting in a nonfunctioning scoop chair, in the up position, which caused her to fall into the floor in the hallway. During an interview with Director of Nursing(DON) # 68, on 11/06/24 at approximately 4:30 AM, she stated she would look into it. On 11/07/24, the DON returned with copies of the Nursing Progress notes from the date of fall (08/20/24), and acknowledged the faulty scoop chair was the cause of Resident #101's fall on 08/20/24. On 8/20/24 at 5:08 PM Note Text: CNA alert this nurse resident was laying on floor on 300 hallway. Resident was sitting up in scoop chair prior to fall. Resident assessed for injury, denies hitting head, ROM…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-09-19 · 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, staff interview, and resident 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. Residents were not given the opportunity to clean/sanitize their hands prior to eating lunch in their rooms. This practice has the potential to affect more than a limited number of residents. Resident identifiers: #105, #68 and #46. Facility census: 111. Findings include: a) Observations of lunch on 9/18/23 at 11:48 AM on the 100 hall found Nurse Aide (NA) #14 delivering and setting up meal trays to Resident (R) #68 and R#46 in their rooms. Neither resident was given the opportunity to clean or sanitize their hands before eating. During an interview with NA #14 immediately after this observation she reported the trays do not contain hand wipes for the residents to use prior to eating and agreed she did not offer them the opportunity to wash their hands at the sink or use of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-19 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — isolatedHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY . Based on record review, family interview and staff interview, the facility failed to make prompt efforts to resolve a grievance and make restitution for a lost cell phone. This is true for one of three phones lost in the facility. Resident identifier: #201. Facility census: 111. Findings include: a) Facility records On [DATE] the facility completed a concern/grievance form for Resident (R) #201 for a missing cell phone. On [DATE] it was determined the cell phone pinged to an employee's home address. The police were notified and took leadership of the investigation. On [DATE] the facility instituted the abuse protocol and notified all appropriate agencies. The five day follow-up form dated [DATE] and signed by the Social Services Director states the suspected employee was suspended pending the investigation and has since quit. The police plan to arrest and charge the nurse aide. The facility will make restitution for the phone. Review of facility records on [DATE], revealed no evidence the facility reimbursed…
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 before2022-12-14 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY . Based on observation, record review and staff interview, the facility failed to establish and maintain an effective infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. The facility failed to perform proper hand hygiene when having direct resident contact or contact with high touch areas for a resident in Transmission Based Precautions (TBP), failed to ensure facility staff utilized appropriate Personal Protection Equipment (PPE) procedures for donning and doffing when caring for residents in TBP, failed to ensure proper disposal of used PPE, and used materials located in a resident's room who was in TBP and failed to ensure Enhanced Barrier Precautions were implemented for residents identified with wounds, and/or indwelling medical devices, placing residents at risk for transmission of infections. This practice had the potential to affect more than a limited number…
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 · E2022-12-14 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — patternHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY . Based on Resident Council meeting, review of Resident Council minutes, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to treat each resident with respect and dignity and care for each resident in a manner and in an environment that promotes maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life in regards to privacy, meal costs and meal services. This was by a random opportunity for discovery and had the potential to affect more than a limited number of residents. Resident identifiers: #1, #24, #46, and #71. Census: 109. a) Resident Council During Resident Council on 12/14/22 at 3:30 PM, the members voiced their concern about the cutbacks on food and snacks. They stated that the staff keep telling them they are unable to have certain food items that was previously available because they cost too much. During Resident Council, Resident #62 stated that the facility could make them biscuits and white gravy instead of bacon and eggs for breakfast, to save money. Review of Resident Council Minutes, dietary…
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 before2022-12-14 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY . Based on observation, staff interview, and facility documentation review, the facility failed to ensure each resident had the right to personal privacy during care and treatments and failed to ensure confidentiality of resident's personal and medical information. Facility staff failed to provide privacy during a treatment/personal care for Resident #30 and Resident #162. The facility staff failed to safeguard confidential information related to residents on the 400 hall, by leaving out assignment sheets in plain view. These failed practices were identified through a random observation for discovery during the Long-Term Care Survey Process (LTCSP), and had the potential to affect more than limited number of residents. Resident identifiers: Resident #30 and Resident # 162. Census: 109. Findings included: a) Resident #162 On 12/13/22 at 11:55 AM, an interview was being conducted with Resident #162's roommate. Resident #162 was not noticed to be in the room. During the interview, Nurse Aide (NA) #1 came into the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-12-14 · 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 operation policy review, observation, and staff interview, the facility failed to report an alleged violations related to neglect and/or abuse, and report the results of all investigation to the proper authorities within the prescribed time frames. This was true for two (2) of three (3) allegations of abuse. Resident identifier: #34. Facility census: 109. Record review of the facility's policy titled, Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation, showed: -The abuse coordinator will report allegations or suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation immediately to the Administrator, other officials in accordance with state law, and State survey and certification agency through established procedures. Findings included: a) Resident #34 During an interview on 12/12/22 at 1:34 PM Resident #34 stated that a male nurse aide reaches up under my gown and grabbed my scrotum. He has done it four (4) times. He stated that he has reported it to other aides. He also provided a name of the accused. On 12/12/22 at 2:15 PM, the alleged allegation of sexual was reported abuse to the Administrator (NHA). the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-12-14 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY . Based on operation policy review, resident interview, and staff interview, the facility failed to take actions to thoroughly investigate an alleged violation related to, sexual and physical abuse and accurately documenting a follow up . Resident identifiers: #34, #73. Facility census: 109. Record review of the facility's policy titled, Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation, showed: - Once a patient is cared for and initial reporting has occurred, an investigation should be conducted, - identifying and interviewing all involved persons including the alleged victim, alleged perpetrator, witnesses, and others who might have knowledge of the allegation. - Providing complete and thorough documentation of the investigation. - Responding immediately to protect the alleged victim and integrity of the investigation. - Room or staff changes, if necessary, to protect the patient from the alleged perpetrator. Findings included: a) Resident #34 1. Alleged Sexual Abuse During an interview on 12/12/22 at 1:34 PM Resident #34 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 · D2022-12-14 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, staff and resident interview, the facility failed to develop and implement a baseline care plan within 48 hours of the resident's admission, which included goals and interventions for immediate health and safety needs and failed to provide the resident or resident's representative a summary of the baseline care plan. This was true for one (1) of seven (7) newly admitted residents reviewed during the LTCSP. Resident identifier: Resident #164. Census: 109 Findings included: a) Resident #164 A record review, conducted on 12/13/22 for #164, showed an admission date of 12/06/22. A review of the admission orders, showed an order dated 12/07/22, for an anti-psychotic medication, Olanzapine 2.5 MG tablet was to be given at bedtime for psychotic disorder AEB; agitation with direction to monitor for side effects. A physician's capacity statement , dated 12/08/22, noted the resident to have capacity to make medical decisions. Additional information was requested from staff (Director of Nursing (DON), on 12/13/22 at 08:00 AM, regarding evidence of behavior monitoring 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 · Dcited before2022-12-14 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on resident and staff interviews, observations and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident with limited range of motion receives appropriate treatment and services. This was true for 1 of 1 resident interviewed. This failed practice had the potential to affect a limited number of residents that currently reside at the facility. Resident identifier: #18. Facility census: 109. Findings Included: Resident #18 on 12/12/22 at 1:31 PM stated that the facility was doing nothing for the increased limited motion in her right hand. She stated that she had therapy for her arm but has never been given therapy for her hand. Resident #18 reports that she is unable to properly ambulate in the wheelchair or able to do things she did to due to the limited range of motion in her hand. On 12/13/22 at 1:13 PM an interview with Occupational Therapist (OT) #21 stated that the resident's right hand was not limited in 2019 during occupational therapy. Based on recent observations the OT #21 stated that he was aware of an increased limited range of motion in Resident #18 right hand. 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 before2022-12-14 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the attending physician documented a rationale for no action taken when reviewing monthly Medication Regimen Review recommendations from the licensed pharmacist. This was true for one (1) of five (5) residents reviewed under the unnecessary medication pathway. Resident identifier #92. Facility census: 109. Findings included: a) Resident #92 On 12/13/22 at 10:15 AM, a medical record review revealed the consulting pharmacist had completed a monthly Medication Regimen Review (MRR) on 09/28/22 and recommended, Practice guidelines for major depression in primary care recommend continuing the same dose for 4-9 months following the acute phase. Whether a patient is to continue therapy in this maintenance phase depends on the established history of previous depressive episodes and the physician assessment. A trial dose reduction may be reasonable at this time. The MRR form noted, on 10/04/22, MD aware - declines. The physician did not document on the MRR form nor was there a rationale as to why no action was taken.…
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 · D2022-12-14 · 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, staff and resident interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident was not administered a psychotropic drug unless, based on a comprehensive assessment of the resident, the drug was medically necessary to treat a specific condition as diagnosed and documented in the resident's medical record. Resident #164 was receiving an anti-psychotic medication without a specific diagnosed behavior, behavior monitoring did not contain a documented specific behavior to be observed and was incomplete. The resident was unaware and had not signed a consent for the administration of the medication. This failed practice was identified in one (1) of five (5) residents reviewed for unnecessary medications during the LTCSP. Resident identifier: Resident #164. Census: 109 Findings included: a) Resident #164 A record review of the electronic medical record for Resident #164 showed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Physician's orders showed the anti-psychotic medication, Olanzapine Tablet…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-12-14 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation and staff interview the facility failed to secure Marinol (Dronabinol) a Schedule III narcotic in a separately locked permanently affixed compartment. This is true for one of two medication rooms reviewed. Resident identifier: 314. Facility census: 109. Findings include: a) An observation of the medication room on the 100/200 hall was completed with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #49 on 12/12/22 at 3:40 PM. This review identified a Marinol (Dronabinol) five milligram punch card for Resident #314 not secured in the permanently affixed compartment in the medication refrigerator. The Marinol punch card was sitting on top of the locked plastic affixed box in the refrigerator. During this observation LPN #49 reported the Marinol is a form of marijuana and is required to be locked up and dispensed like other controlled medications. LPN #49 added it always sits on top of the locked plastic permanently fixed compartment in the refrigerator. .
- Potential for harm · D2022-12-14 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — isolatedEnsure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, resident interview, record review and facility documentation review, the facility failed to ensure a reasonable effort was put forth when providing food items to residents to meet the individual needs and preferences of the resident. This was identified in one (1) of two (2) residents reviewed for food during the LTCSP. The facility failed to provide Resident #1 food items during meals based on an assessed and identified food preference. Resident identifier: Resident #1. Census:109. Findings included: a) Resident #1 An interview with Resident #1, on 12/12/22 at 11:45 AM, revealed food preferences are not always honored after being identified with dietary personnel. Resident #1 stated she preferred two slices of toast for breakfast and preferred diet sugar and diet jelly when served. A record review for Resident #1 showed an order for a regular diet with a resident preference of two (2) slices of toast in the AM. An observation of the breakfast meal on 12/13/22 at 08:15 AM, revealed Resident #1 received the breakfast tray with one piece of toast with regular…
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 before2022-12-14 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on policy review, observation, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure food items kept in the north nourishment room were labeled and dated. This had the potential to affect all residents receiving nourishment from the refrigerator on the north side of the facility. Resident identifier: 34. Facility census: 109. Findings included: a) North Nourishment Room Review of the facility's Use and Storage of Food Brought in by Family or Visitors policy, revised 05/03/21, indicated all food items brought in by family or visitors must be labeled with content and dated. During an observation, on 12/13/22 at 11:34 AM, the north nourishment room refrigerator had a 2 lb. container of potato salad that was opened, but undated. During a subsequent interview, CNA #49 identified the potato salad belonged to Resident #34 and was not dated as per facility protocol. .
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-12-14 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to maintain an accurate medical record for one (1) of four (4) sampled residents reviewed for Advance Directives during the Long-Term Care Survey process. Resident identifier: #312. Facility census: 109. Findings included: a) Resident #312 A record review, completed on 12/12/22 at 3:14 PM, identifed the following records: -A Medical Power of Attorney (MPOA), dated 03/26/2007, indicating I am giving the following SPECIAL DIRECTIVES OR LIMITATIONS ON THIS POWER: I do not wish to be placed on artificial life support. -A Physician Orders for Scope of Treatment (POST) form, dated 02/26/22, indicating the MPOA had selected Full Treatments under Section B of the POST. Subsequent review of of theUsing the POST Form Guidance for Health Care Professionals indicated all support measures needed to maintain and extend life are utilized. Use intubation, advanced airway interventions, mechanical ventilation, and electrical cardioversion as indicated. It also indicated healthcare providers are to review a patient ' s advance directives…
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
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
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 | 4 of 5 | 2.7 | +1.3 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 2.6 | -0.6 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 3 of 5 | 4.5 | -1.5 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 | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| ROMEO, DOMINIC | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 04/01/2023 |
| STOLTZ, CHARLES | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 07/01/2022 |
| MILLER MGT CO., LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 04/25/2025 |
| GHIAS, MONA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 07/01/2023 |
| GROVES, DONNA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 04/14/2023 |
| HAMRICK, TRISTA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/13/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 10 rows in the source record cover these 6 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 85% 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 $1.5M paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in WV
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the West Virginia Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 515072. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-05-14, 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.