Lindside Healthcare Center
10797 Seneca Trail South, Lindside, WV 24951 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 60 certified beds · (304) 753-4332 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607, F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (40) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 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 | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 4 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 3 to 4 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 | 16.8% | 14.7% | 15.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 5.3% | 6.3% | 5.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.4% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.0% | 1.6% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 1.1% | 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 | 5.2% | 4.4% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 14.1% | 15.9% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 33.2% | 27.0% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 98.3% | 97.6% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 2.7% | 4.2% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 20.3% | 22.1% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 11.0% | 13.4% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.0% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 64.9% | 79.4% | 79.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 19.3% | 22.5% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 9.8% | 11.3% | 12.0% | better |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
50.8% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 54 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.14 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 10% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 14% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 50.8%CMS range 42.7–63.2 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 11.2%CMS range 7.5–17.0 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 90.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 6.7% | 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 | 10.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 8.7%CMS range 5.1–13.7 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.09 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 60 beds and averages 57.0 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 3 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 3.98 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.96 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.30 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.19 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.30 on weekdays — 26% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 1.23 to 0.29 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 51% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are unchanged from the previous inspection. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
40 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 30 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-11 · tag F0552 — isolatedEnsure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to obtain informed consent for a psychotropic medication for Resident #4. This was true for one (1) of five (5) residents reviewed under the care area of unnecessary medications. Resident Identifier: #4. Facility Census: 53.Findings Included: a) Resident #4 On 03/10/26 at 1:23 PM, a record review was completed for Resident #4. The review found a physician's order, dated 02/24/26, for Zoloft 25 mg one (1) tablet by mouth one (1) time a day for depression. Upon further review, a signed informed consent was not found for the medication in the medical record. On 03/10/2026 at 2:45 PM, the Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed the informed consent was not obtained for Zoloft.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-11 · tag F0574 — isolatedThe resident has the right to receive notices in a format and a language he or she understands.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on resident interviews, observation, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the full contact information for the Office of Health Facilities Licensure and Certification (OHFLAC) was posted for the residents. This was a random opportunity for discovery during the required resident council meeting during the Long-Term Care Survey Process. Census: 53. Findings included:During the Resident council meeting which began at 2:05 PM and ended at 2:38 PM on 03/10/26, residents stated they did not have the number for OHFLAC and did not know how to call and complain. When the meeting ended, the State Surveyor checked the posters with important contact information that were posted in the front hallway. The OHFLAC address was listed but not the phone number. During an interview on 03/10/26 at 3:29 PM, the Director of Social Services confirmed that the number was not posted.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-11 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure advance directives were correct and in accordance with Resident #44's wishes. This was true for one (1) of 19 residents reviewed for accurate advance directives throughout the Long-Term Care Survey Process. Resident Identifier: #44. Census: 53.Findings included: In the facility's policy titled [NAME] Virginia Code Status, Section IV Conflict Resolution directed, In the event there is a conflict between the orders on a resident's POST [Physician Orders for Scope of Treatment] form and his/her advance directive, then the conflict will be resolved as below considering: ii. whether the resident initialed the authorization box in section D on the POST form which allows a new form to be completed for a deterioration in the resident's condition.The POST form, dated and signed by Resident #44 on 12/19/23, did not have the authorization box marked and was marked as a full code.The POST form, dated 11/26/25, was marked Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) and signed by the Resident's Medical Power of Attorney (MPOA).In an interview…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-11 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based upon observation, resident interview, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a safe, clean, comfortable homelike environment. This was found to be true for one (1) of 24 residents reviewed during the Long-Term Care Survey Process. Resident identifier: #13. Facility census: 53. Findings included: a) Resident #13 During an initial interview with Resident #13, on 03/09/26 at 11:10 AM, the resident was sitting in her recliner. The recliner was approximately 3 - 4 feet away from the wall. The surveyor observed an area of approximately one (1) square foot on the wall behind the recliner which had been patched with a white substance. Surveyor asked the resident how long the wall had been missing paint in that area. Resident stated it had probably been at least two months. At approximately 11:28 AM on 03/09/26, the surveyor asked the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) to accompany her to the resident's room. The unpainted area on the wall was pointed out. The NHA stated yes, that was where we patched in preparation for painting. A few minutes later while walking back down…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-11 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure accuracy of Minimum Data Set (MDS) in regard to immunizations. This was true for one (1) of one (1) residents reviewed for respiratory care throughout the Long-Term Care Survey Process. Resident identifier: #10. Census: 53.Findings included: Review of the MDS, Section O showed Resident #10 was not up-to-date with the Covid 19 vaccination. Review of the immunization record showed Resident #10 had last Moderna Covid 19 vaccination on 10/20/25. During an interview on 03/10/26 at 2:55 PM, Clinical Manager RN #71 confirmed that Moderna is a one-dose vaccine and Resident #10 was up-to-date for 2025-2026. It was also confirmed that the MDS was coded incorrectly.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-11 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure quality of care for residents. This failed practice was found true for one (1) of (4) four residents reviewed under the care area of accidents and one (1) of five (5) residents reviewed under the unnecessary medications pathway throughout the Long-Term Care Survey Process. Resident identifiers: #4 and Resident #7. Facility Census: 53. Findings included: a) Resident #34 A conversation with the Director of Nursing (DON), on 03/10/26 at 1:15 PM, revealed Resident #34 had a physician order to use the Omnicycle six days a week for restorative therapy. Record review revealed Resident #34 used the Omnicycle on the following dates:-02/13/26-02/14/26-02/16/26-02/18/26-02/19/26-02/23/26-02/24/26-02/25/26-02/27/26-03/04/26-03/06/26-03/07/26-03/09/26 Resident refused on the following dates:-02/20/26-02/21/26 It was observed N/A was marked on the following dates:-03/03/26-03/05/26-03/02/26-02/26/26-02/17/26-02/12/26-02/11/26 In speaking with the DON, the column N/A could mean a number of things; however, the fact is 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 · Dcited before2026-03-11 · 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 upon resident interview, observation, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a safe environment to prevent a tripping hazard. This was found to be true for one (1) of 24 residents reviewed during the Long-Term Care Survey Process. Resident identifier: #13. Facility census: 53. Findings included: a) Resident #13 During an initial interview with the resident on 03/09/2026 at 11:10 AM, she asked if the State Agency (SA) would look at the floor going into the bathroom. The resident stated, I am afraid I will trip on it. She further stated she had reported it several times, and maintenance had fixed it once, but it did not stay. The surveyor opened the door to the bathroom and observed the transition strip on the flooring in the doorway was bent upward and the wooden floor beneath it was bent downward creating a gap. This gap created a potential tripping hazard. At approximately 11:28 AM, the SA asked the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) to accompany the SA to the resident's room. The surveyor pointed out the gap in the threshold in the resident's bathroom. The NHA…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-11 · tag F0732 — isolatedPost nurse staffing information every day.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based upon observation, record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to post nurse staffing information in a prominent location, readily available for review to the public. Additionally, the facility failed to maintain current information pertaining to actual hours worked by registered nurses, licensed practical nurses or nurse aides. Census: 53Findings included: a) Observation Upon initial entrance to the facility on [DATE] at approximately 10:00 AM, the Surveyor looked for the posted nurse staffing information in the lobby, front living room area, and main entrance area where many other signs were posted. The nurse staffing data was not found. The nurse staffing data was only located after asking the Nursing Home Administrator where it was located. The nurse staffing sheet was posted in the hallway near the nursing station. b) Record Review Posted nurse staffing data was reviewed for the following…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-11 · tag F0744 — failed to care for residents with dementia — isolatedProvide the appropriate treatment and services to a resident who displays or is diagnosed with dementia.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to develop a care plan with measurable goals and interventions to address the care and treatment for a resident with dementia. This failed practice was found true for (1) one of (5) five residents reviewed for dementia care during the Long-Term Care Survey Process. Resident identifier #7. Facility census: 53. Findings included: a) Resident #7 A record review, completed on 03/10/26 at 12:30 PM, revealed a diagnosis of dementia for Resident #7, dated 10/20/22. Further review of Resident #7's care plan revealed no dementia care plan with measurable goals and interventions developed. During an interview on 03/10/26 at 2:56, the interim Minimum Data Set Registered Nurse (MDSRN) stated, The doctor did give him that diagnosis; we just missed it. We did not develop a care plan for his dementia.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-11 · 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 interviews, the facility failed to ensure an accurate and complete medical record. This failed practice was found to be true for (2) two of (5) five residents reviewed under the care area of unnecessary medications during the Long-Term Care Survey Process. Resident identifiers: #43 and #3. Facility Census: 53. Findings included: a) Resident #43 A record review, completed on 03/09/26 at 2:27 PM, revealed an allergy for Resident #43 to the medication Loxitane. Further review of Resident #43's current medications revealed that he has been prescribed Loxitane since his admission in November of 2018. The admission history and physical (H&P), dated 09/24/18, shows Loxitane was taken off as an allergy, however it was still listed as an allergy in his medical record. During an interview on 03/10/26 at approximately 1:30 PM, the Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed that Resident #43 is not allergic to Loxitane and has been on it since admission. The DON further confirmed that listing Loxitane as an allergy was incorrect. b) Resident #3 On 03/09/26 at 3:00 PM,…
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 30 citations
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-11 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to offer Pneumococcal vaccinations to aid in the prevention of Pneumonia. This failed practice was found true for (2) two of (5) five residents reviewed for vaccinations during the Long-Term Care Survey Process. Resident identifiers: Resident #15 and Resident #4. Facility Census 53.Findings included: a) Resident #15A record review, completed on 03/11/26 at 9:43 AM, revealed that Resident #15 lacked documentation showing the pneumococcal vaccination was offered.During an interview on 03/11/26 at 10:05 AM, the Infection Preventionist (IP) stated, He had the vaccinations before he came here. She presented a document from a local pharmacy indicating he had all vaccinations except the pneumococcal vaccination. The State Agency (SA) pointed out to the IP that the document did not indicate the pneumococcal vaccination had been given. The IP stated, I guess he refused it.Further record review revealed no declination in the medical record for 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 · E2026-02-10 · tag F0628 — patternProvide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on document review and staff interview, the facility failed to provide written documentation upon discharge on the right to appeal and provide contact information to the Ombudsman and local State Agency. This was true for 3 of 3 residents reviewed (Residents #61, #62, and #63). Facility census 58. Review of the discharge documentation on 02/10/26 during the hours of 10:15 a.m. through 11:15 a.m. for Residents #61, #62, and #63 revealed no readily available documentation that included any written information on the resident's right to appeal discharge with contact information to the local Ombudsman or State Agency. An interview on 02/10/26 at 11:40 a.m. with the facility's Director of Nursing (DON) verified these findings. These findings were also acknowledged by the facility's Administrator at the exit conference on 02/10/26 at approximately 12:30 p.m.
- Potential for harm · E2024-08-21 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — patternDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to implement the facility Policy and Procedure entitled, West Virginia Abuse, Neglect and Misappropriation by failing to thoroughly investigate incidents of abuse between residents. The facility failed to obtain statements from staff who were working at the time of the incident. Furthermore, the facility failed to assess and interview like residents of the facility. This failed practice was true for three (three) of 5 (five) residents reviewed for abuse. Resident identifiers: #30, #54, and #1. Facility census: 54. Findings included: a) Resident #30 On 08/21/24 at approximately 10:00 AM, a review of the Facility Reported Incident (FRI) dated 07/26/24 was conducted revealing that on the morning of 07/26/24 at 10:30 AM. Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #82 witnessed Resident #207 pat Resident #30's mid section through his clothing. Further review of this investigation revealed 3 (three) statements which are typed as written and read as follows: Statement from LPN #82: I witnessed Resident #207 touching Resident #30 on his…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-08-21 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — patternRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to thoroughly investigate thoroughly investigate 2 (two) instances of resident-to-resident sexual abuse and one instance of resident-to-resident physical abuse by failing to obtain statements from staff who were working at the time of the incidents, furthermore the facility failed to assess and interview like residents of the facility. This failed practice was true for 3 (three) of 5 (five) residents reviewed for abuse. Resident identifiers: #30, #54, #1 and #39. Facility Census: 54. Findings included: a) Resident #30 On 08/21/24 at approximately 10:00 AM, a review of the Facility Reported Incident (FRI) dated 07/26/24 was conducted revealing that on the morning of 07/26/24 at 10:30 AM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #82 witnessed Resident #207 pat Resident #30's mid section through his clothing. Further review of this investigation revealed 3 (three) statements which are typed as written and read as follows: Statement from LPN #82: I witnessed Resident #207 touching Resident #30 on his genital area outside his pants. I…
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 before2024-08-21 · 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 provide evidence a resident/resident's representative was provided a written Notice of Transfer for an acute hospital transfer. The facility also failed to provide evidence that a copy of the Notice of Transfer was sent to the Ombudsman. This was true for three (3) out of four (4) hospital transfers reviewed during the long-term care process. This had the potential to affect all residents being transferred or discharged . Resident identifiers: #20, #38, and #29. Facility census: 54. Findings included: a) Resident #29 Medical Record review on 08/21/24 revealed resident #29 was discharged to the hospital on [DATE]. Subsequent review of Resident #29's medical record showed it did not contain documentation that the Notice of Transfer or Discharge was provided to the Resident Representative, or the Ombudsman was notified of the discharges on 08/13/24. On 08/21/24 at 5:58 PM during an interview the Administrator verified, there was 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 · Ecited before2024-08-21 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — patternProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, resident, and staff interview. The facility failed to ensure that a resident received the treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice in regard to monitoring pain levels. This was true for three (3) of five (5) residents reviewed for pain during the Long-Term Survey Process. Resident Identifier: #26, #29, and #157. Facility census: 54. Findings included: a) Resident #29 Medical record review revealed Resident #29 had a broken hip. The resident had a physician orders for pain management. The oder was for Acetaminophen Oral Tablet (Acetaminophen). Give 500 mg by mouth every six (6) hours as needed for pain. The order stated, Do not exceed 3000mg total dose in a 24-hour period from any medication with a state date 08/02/24. A continued review of Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed: --08/13/24 at 8:06 AM pain level 8 - Acetaminophen 500 mg tablet given. --08/14/24 at 7:09 AM pain level 8 - Acetaminophen 500 mg tablet given. An interview on 08/21/24 at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-21 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolatedHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on resident interview, staff interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the right to make choices about aspects of life that is important to one (1) of three (3) residents reviewed for choices. Specifically, Resident #35 was not given showers when requested or the choice. Resident identifiers: #19, and #35. Facility census: 54. Findings included: a) Resident #35 During an interview with Resident #35 on 08/19/24 at 2:44 PM, she stated she never received her shower when she prefered. Resident #35 continued to say that she would like to have showers at least every other day. Medical record review revealed, Resident #35's shower schedule was on Saturday, Sunday, Monday, Wednesday, and Thursday on day shift. A review of the 06/07/24 Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), found the resident's brief interview for mental status was fifteen (15). A continued review of Resident #35s ADL documentation found; she was not receiving showers as scheduled. On 08/21/24 at 3:37 PM during an Interview with Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) stated that they have been working with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-21 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to notify the representative/family of an acute hospitalization. This was true for two (2) out of three (3) residents reviewed for the care area of hospitalization during the Long-Term Care Survey process. Resident identifier: Resident #20. Facility census 54. Findings included: a) Resident #20 A record review, completed, on 08/20/24 at 7:09 PM, revealed Resident #20 had capacity to make his own medical decisions. Record review also revealed Resident #20 was transferred to the hospital on [DATE]. A Nurses Note, dated 02/16/2023 at 10:41 PM, noted that Resident #20 had informed the nurse he was not feeling well and that he just wanted to go to the hospital. The physician was notified and new orders were received to send resident to the emergency room for evaluation. There was no evidence resident's daughter was notified. Section E. Key Contacts of the eInteract Transfer form, dated 02/16/24, listed resident as his own Resident Representative. There…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-21 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to timely report allegations of suspected abuse between residents timely within the 2 (two) hour window to the appropriate State Agency. This failed practice was true for 2 (two) of 5 (five) residents reviewed for abuse. Resident Identifiers: Resident #39, Resident #01 and Resident #207. Facility Census: 54. Findings include: a) Resident #39 On 08/21/24 at approximately 10:00 AM, a review of the Facility Reported Incident (FRI) dated 06/18/24 was conducted revealing that on the morning of 06/13/24 during the afternoon Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #71 reported that Resident #207 appeared to be touching the private are of Resident #39. LPN #71 stated she immediately separated the residents and re-directed each of them. During the review of this FRI, it was noted the allegation type selected was sexual abuse, which according to the reporting requirements of the Office of Health Facility Licensure and Certification Long Term Care Nursing Home Program must be reported to the appropriate state agency within 2 hours of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-21 · tag F0625 — isolatedNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
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 review and staff interview, the facility failed to provide the resident/resident representative notice of the bed hold policy when Resident #29 was transferred to a local hospital. This was true for one (1) of three (3) residents reviewed for transfers. Resident identifier: #29. Facility census: 54. Findings included: a) Resident #29 Medical Record review on 08/21/24 revealed Resident #29 was discharged to the hospital on [DATE]. Continued review of Resident #29's medical record showed it did not contain documentation that the resident or the resident's representative received a copy of the bed hold policy at the time of transfer. In addition, there was no documentation in the medical record of contacting the resident / resident representative regarding the bed hold policy. In an interview with the Administrator on 08/21/24 at 5:58 PM, the Administrator confirmed there was no documentation regarding staff notifying the resident/resident representative of the bed hold policy for the hospital…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-21 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, resident, and staff interview. The facility failed to assist dependent Residents with activities of daily living (ADL's) in accordance with the Residents assessed needs for care. This is true for one (1) of three (3) residents reviewed for ADL care. Resident identifiers: #108. Facility census: 54. Findings included: a) Resident #108 During an interview, on 08/19/24 at 1:02 PM, Resident #108 stated she had never had a bath / shower or had her hair washed since she was admitted . A record review revealed Resident #108 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Continued review found no documentation of bathing from 08/14/24 through 08/21/24. On 08/21/24 at 3:37 PM during an Interview with Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) stated that they have been working with staff and trying to get resident showers when they prefer. She verified Resident #108 was not getting her showers as scheduled.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-21 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to follow a physician's order to be notified of blood sugar greater than 400 for Resident #23. This was true for 1 (one) of 1 (one) residents reviewed for the Long Term Care Survey Process. Facility census: 54. Resident identifier: #23. Findings included: a) Resident #23 On 08/19/24 at 03:48 PM, a record review was conducted for Resident #23 revealing orders for the following: Lantus Subcutaneous Solution 100 UNIT/ML (Insulin Glargine) Inject 48 unit subcutaneously one time a day for DM 2 Obtain blood sugar at 6 AM and PM. Notify physician if blood glucose less than 60 or over 400 two (2) times a day for diabetes On 08/20/24 at 03:06 PM, a review was conducted of Resident #23's progress notes and Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealing the following documentation: 1. 08/03/2024 5:46 PM - Medication Administration Note Note Text: Obtain blood sugar at 6 AM and PM. Notify physician if blood glucose less than 60 or over 400. 2. 08/01/2024 16:38 Nurses Note Note Text: BS 455. Left message with NP. Awaiting…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-21 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interviews with facility staff, and a review of facility policy and procedures, it was determined that the facility failed to follow acceptable infection control practices that controlled, or prevented, the spread of infection. This practice had the potential to affect all residents that reside in the facility. Facility Census: 54. Findings included: a) Water Management On 08/23/24 at 3:34 PM, during a review of water management, it was discovered that the facility lacked a Water Management Plan. Additionally, there was no text and flow documentation available that detailed the facility's water system, including control points where Legionella control measures, like dead leg water flushes, were required. During a face-to-face interview with Executive Director (ED) #29 on 08/23/24 at 3:52 PM, she stated that she was not aware of the requirement for a text and flow description of the water system. The Regional Director of Clinical Operations (RDCO) #110 overheard the conversation and mentioned that the facility's Emergency Management Plan should contain this…
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 · F2023-10-04 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — widespreadMake sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on staff interview, observation, and facility documents the facility failed to ensure the facility cleaning solution used to disinfect was used in accordance with manufacture directions. This failed practice had the potential to affect more than a limited number of residents. Facility census 60. Findings included: a) Using the facility disinfectant On 10/04/23 at 10:34 AM, Housekeeping Director (HD) #77 was asked about the cleaning agents used to clean resident rooms. On 10/04/23 at 11:08 AM, HD #77 provided a facility document titled Product Specification Document. The Direction for use of this product is as follows: Apply solution with a cloth, sponge, mop, or spray. Allow to air dry. Rinse food contact surfaces with potable water prior to reuse. For Spray applications, spray 6 to 8 inches from the surface. Allow the surface to remain wet for 3 minutes. Allow to air dry or after 3 minutes wipe with mop, cloth, or sponge. During an interview on 10/04/23 at 1:42 PM, Housekeeper (HK) #62 was asked about using the facility cleaning agent, Multi-Purpose Plus Disinfectant Cleaner.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-10-04 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — patternProvide activities to meet all resident's needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, resident interview, staff interview, and Resident council meeting. The facility failed to meet the needs and Preferences of each resident, through an ongoing program to support residents in their choice of activities, both facility-sponsored group and individual activities and independent activities, designed to meet the interests of and support the physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident, encouraging both independence and interaction in the community. This failed practice had the potential to affect more than a limited number of residents that currently reside in the facility. Resident identifiers: #41, #32, #17, #3, #40, #31, #8, #26, #11, #37, and #39. Facility census 60. Findings included: a) Resident #26 b) Resident council On 10/04/23 at 2:30 PM a Resident Council meeting was held and the following members were present: Resident: #41, #32, #17, #3, #40, #31, #8, #11, #37, and #39. The residents said they do not feel like they have enough activities and even less on the weekends. All of the residents were in agreement that one hour…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-10-04 · tag F0801 — patternEmploy sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, including a qualified dietician.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on employee record review, and staff interview the facility failed to ensure all dietary staff had a food handlers' card, to ensure the safe handling of the food for the Residents. This failed practice had to potential to affect more than a limited number of Residents that currently reside at the facility. Facility census 60. Findings included: a) Food handlers' cards On 10/04/23 at 10:00 AM a review of the facility's food handler cards for all dietary staff found, [NAME] #25 did not have a food handlers card. Cook #25 was hired on 09/08/23 and does not have a food handler card. An interview with Culinary Director on 10/04/23 at 10:20 AM said [NAME] #25 is signed up to have a class on 10/16/23. However, she can take the course online today.
- Potential for harm · D2023-08-15 · tag F0559 — isolatedHonor the resident's right to share a room with spouse or roommate of choice and receive written notice before a change is made.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, policy review, and staff interview, the facility failed to honor the Resident's rights by not providing a written notice prior for a Residents room change. This is true for two (2) of two (2) Residents reviewed for room change. Resident Identifiers: Resident # 29 and Resident #7. Facility Census: 56. Findings Included: A review of the facility policy titled Resident Room Change Policy read as follows. .Procedure: .2. Notification of Change/Updates a. Social Services will complete Notification of Room Change and New Roommate Notification forms in the Electronic Medical Record (EMR) b. Social Service will document discussions with both residents and residents representatives. a) Resident #29 During a record review on 08/14/23 at 6:30 PM, Resident #29's medical record revealed Resident #29 had room changes on the following dates: -05/23/23 -06/02/23 -06/19/23 -07/05/23 Further record review revealed a Social Services Note for room change dated 6/19/2023 at 12:59 PM(typed as written) Spoke with resident regarding room change. Patient is agreeable to room change…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-08-15 · tag F0623 — isolatedProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, facility policy, and staff interview the facility failed to provide evidence that a Transfer Notice was sent to the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman when three (3) residents were transferred to the hospital. This was true for three (3) of three (3) Residents reviewed for hospital transfers. Resident identifiers: #37, #43, and #29. Facility census: 56. Findings Included: A review of the facility policy titled Bed Hold Policy with no initiated or revision date read as follows. .Procedure: 1. In the event a resident returns to the hospital or goes on a leave, the following process will be followed by the facility: a. The nurse or designee will present the Acute Transfer letter at time of transfer with a copy going with the resident and a copy going to the Business Office Manager. Designee will scan to the Ombudsman. a) Resident #37 During a record review on 08/14/23 at 12:45 PM, Resident #37's medical record revealed Resident #37 was transferred to a local hospital on [DATE] with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-08-15 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, staff, and resident interview the facility failed to ensure medication used in the treatment of diabetes was available for administration. This failed practice was true for one (1) of three (3) residents reviewed for insulin administration. Resident identifier: #8. Facility census: 56. Findings included: a) Resident #8 Record review showed an order for Trulicity Subcutaneous Solution Pen-injector 0.75 MG/0.5ML (Dulaglutide). Inject 0.75 mg subcutaneously one time a day every Thursday for Type 2 diabetes. Review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) showed Resident #8 missed 2 doses of Trulicity in July. On 07/13/23 the drug was documented as refused with no other explanation. On 07/20/23, the dose was documented as not given and the MAR stated see nurses note. The nurse's note for that occurrence stated, awaiting delivery from pharmacy. During an interview on 08/14/23 at 3:58 PM, Resident #8 stated that she does not remember refusing any insulin shots. The Resident stated that is one thing she wants to keep up on because she doesn't want…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-08-15 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to implement and follow the specified pain parameters described within the physicians' order when administering pain medication. This was true for one (1) of three (3) Residents reviewed in the care area of pain. Resident identifier: #12. Facility census: 56. Findings included: a) Resident #12 Record review showed an order for Percocet Oral Tablet 5-325 MG (Oxycodone w/ Acetaminophen) Give 1 tablet by mouth every 6 hours as needed (PRN) for moderate to severe pain. Start date of order 07/14/23. Review of Resident #12's Medication Administration Record (MAR) showed Resident #12 was administered the as needed Percocet Oral Tablet 5-325 MG for 26 occurrences for a pain level of zero (0) in the month of July and August: 07/17/23 at 5:45 PM 07/17/23 at 11:00 PM 07/18/23 at 4:50 AM 07/19/23 at 12:15 PM 07/20/23 at 7:38 AM 07/20/23 at 8:34 PM 07/21/23 at 3:05 AM 07/22/23 at 3:49 AM 07/22/23 at 7:15 PM 07/24/23 at 4:47 PM 07/24/23 at 10:53 PM 07/26/23 at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-08-15 · tag F0809 — failed to serve meals on a reasonable schedule — isolatedEnsure meals and snacks are served at times in accordance with resident’s needs, preferences, and requests. Suitable and nourishing alternative meals and snacks must be provided for residents who want to eat at non-traditional times or outside of scheduled meal times.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, staff interview, and Resident interviews, the facility failed to provide Residents with evening snacks. This is true for 11 of 23 Residents requiring evening snacks. Resident identifiers: Resident #30, Resident #1, Resident #7, Resident #43, Resident #51, Resident #4, Resident #8, Resident #15, Resident #14, Resident #53 and Resident #37. Facility Census 56. Findings Included: a) Snacks During a tour of the nourishment room on 08/14/23 at 8:55 AM, the refrigerator revealed a tray of snacks dated 08/12 Sat (Saturday) PM for the following residents: -Pudding: Resident #37 Resident #43 -Nectar Thickened Water: Resident #30 -½ Sandwiches: Resident #1 Resident #7 Resident #51 Resident #4 Resident #8 Resident #15 Resident #14 Resident #53 During an interview on 08/14/23 at 9:44 AM, the Director of Nursing (DON) stated the Residents might have eaten something else, I will have to look at the snack documentation record to see what was documented. During an interview on 08/14/23 at 11:43 PM, the Culinary Director (CD) stated we send out the snacks, but the nurses…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2022-10-19 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — patternProvide activities to meet all resident's needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, resident council meeting, resident interview and staff interviews, the facility failed to implement an ongoing resident centered activities program designed to meet the interest of and support the physical, mental and psychosocial well-being of each resident. The facility failed to implement evening activities of interest for the residents. This was a random opportunity for discovery. Facility census: 57. Findings Included: a) Resident Council During the Resident Council Meeting held on 10/18/22 at 2:43 PM the Residents as a group were asked the question, How are the activities? The following concerns were voiced. -Could be more activities, -We need evening activities, we do nothing but sit in our rooms after dinner. -It's so boring in the evenings, We need more to do in the evening. -We need someone to help us set out the games and stuff but some of the others need help participating in the games that are available. -The last activity is at 2:00 PM and then nothing. A review of previous Resident Council minutes revealed a Resident Council Meeting held 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 · E2022-10-19 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — patternProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to have two (2) licensed nurses to sign off at the beginning and ending of the shift to verify the control substances were accurate and accounted for as directed. This failed practice had the potential to affect more than a limited number of residents. This was discovered during the medication pass on 10/18/22. Facility census: 57. Findings included: Review of Unit 1/2 medication cart found the following days the narcotic book was only signed by one (1) licensed nurse: 10/02/22-not signed by oncoming nurse on the 6a-6p shift and the off going nurse on the 6p-6 am 10/06/22- not signed by oncoming nurse on the 6a-6p shift and the off going nurse on the 6p-6 am 10/10/22- not signed by oncoming nurse on the 6a-6p shift and the off going nurse on the 6p-6 am 10/15/22- not signed by oncoming nurse on the 6a-6p shift and the off going nurse on the 6p-6 am 10/16/22-not signed by oncoming nurse on the 6a-6p shift and the off going nurse on the 6p-10/18/22- not signed by oncoming nurse on the 6a-6p shift and the off going…
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 · E2022-10-19 · 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 medical record review and staff interview, the consultant pharmacist failed to complete a medication regimen review every thirty (30) days. This was true for Residents #13, #29, #16 and #36. Additionally, the facility failed to timely complete a gradual dose reduction (GDR) as approved by the physician. Resident identifiers: #13, #29, #16 and #36. Facility census: 57. Findings included: a) Policy A review of the policy titled Medication Regimen Review (MRR) Time Frame with an implemented date of 11/27/17 and a review date of 05/03/21 was as follows: The medication regimen of each patient is reviewed at least once a month by a licensed Consultant Pharmacist. b) Resident #13 A review of Resident #13's MRR completed by the consultant pharmacist monthly for the last year revealed on 03/28/22, the consultant pharmacist stated this date was done on 03/28/22 for the period of 02/01/22 through 02/28/22. There was not an MRR completed for February 2022. c) Resident #29 A review of Resident #29's MRR completed by the consultant pharmacist monthly for the last year revealed 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 · E2022-10-19 · 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, policy review and staff interview the facility failed to store food in accordance with professional standards for food safety. The facility failed to label and date food items that were open and failed to dispose of expired food items. This failed practice had the potential to affect more than a limited number of residents currently receiving nourishment from the facility's kitchen. Facility Census: 57 Findings Included: A facility policy titled labeling and dating with a date of 2017 stated the following. .Guidelines for Labeling and Dating .Food labels must include: -The food name -The date of preparation/receipt/removal from freezer -The use by date . Use By Dating Guidelines -The manufacturer's expiration date, when, available is the use by for unopened items a) Walk-in Refrigerator A facility policy titled food storage and retention guide with a date of 2017 stated the following. .Shelf Stable Foods . Condiments after opening in refrigerator less than 41 degrees Fahrenheit -Pickles: one (1) to two (2) weeks -Salad dressing: three (3) months -Vinegar: two…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-10-19 · tag 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 observation, resident and staff interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide an extra over-the-bed table for meals to prevent further injury due to spilled tray which cause a second (2nd) degree burn on right foot. Resident identifier: #2. Facility census: 57. Findings included: a) Resident #2 An interview and observation with Resident #2, on 10/17/22 at 1:53 PM, found the resident in bed with the right foot wrapped in a cling dressing. Resident #2 stated that she had suffered a burn from coffee on 10/10/22. She stated her tray fell off because she keeps her personal items close to be able to reach them throughout the day and her tray doesn't fit on the table very well. Review of Resident #2's incident report dated 10/10/22 at 3:30 PM, which reads: Resident requested her Unna Boot ( is a compressive dressing used in the treatment of venous stasis ulcers) to be removed due to her tray had spilled and coffee had went into her Unna boot on the right foot and it was burning. When the boot was removed, it was noted to have a blister measuring 2 centimeters (cm)…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-10-19 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a Physicians Orders for Scope of Treatment (POST) form was completed by the appropriate designee for one (1) of two (2) residents reviewed for advance directives. This failed practice had the potential to affect only a limited number of residents. Resident identifier: #35. Facility census: 57. Findings included: a) Resident #35 Record review showed Resident #35's POST form was completed and signed by the Resident's Health Care Surrogate (HCS) on 02/26/20. Further record review showed a physician's determination of capacity that was completed on 11/01/21 indicating at that time the Resident demonstrated incapacity to make medical decisions. During an interview on 10/19/22 at 12:46 PM, the Director of Nursing (DON) verified the POST form was completed by the Resident's HCS prior to the Resident being incapacitated. The DON confirmed the Resident should have been the one to complete and sign the form at that time. .
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-10-19 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to follow the physician orders for Resident #109 with a order for Lidocaine patches without a dosage and Resident #2's orders for treatment of a second degree burn on the right foot. These failed practices had the potential to affect a limited number of residents. Resident identifiers: #109 and #2. Facility census: 57. Findings included: a) Resident #109 During medication pass on 10/18/22 at 8:15 AM Resident #109 had an order for a Lidocaine patch to be applied to the left hip topically daily for eleven (11) days for pain. The order on the electronic Medication Administration Record (MAR) did not have a dosage. Further review found the physician had ordered a Lidocaine patch 4%. In an interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 10/18/22 at 1:15 PM confirmed the order failed to have the dosage and the order was updated immediately. b) Resident #2 Review of Resident #2's incident report dated 10/10/22 at 3:30 PM, which reads: Resident requested her Unna Boot (is a compressive dressing used in 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 · Dcited before2022-10-19 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the resident's environment was as free of accident hazards as possible. Unit 3/4 medication cart was left unlocked and unattended. This was a random opportunity for discovery. Facility census: 57. Findings included: On 10/18/22 at 3:11 PM, the Unit 3/4 medication cart was observed to be unlocked and unattended. The Director of Nursing was notified immediately. A list of residents who wanders was requested. The list of wandering residents contained the following residents: #47, #28, #15, #49, #52, #41, #55 and #53. No further information was provided. .
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-10-19 · 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 medical record review, staff interview and resident interview, the facility failed to ensure a complete and accurate medical record. The facility failed to document Resident #6's bathing task and Resident #51's weights in the electronic medical record. This was a random opportunity of discovery. Resident identifiers: Resident #6 and Resident #51. Facility Census: 57 Findings Included: a) Resident #6 During an interview on 10/17/22 at 2:03 PM, Resident # 6 stated that I get a shower most of the time, they skip a few, don't get as many as I should, I think I am scheduled two (2) times a week. During a medical record review on 10/18/22 revealed Resident #6's bathing documentation as follows: Bed bath: -09/20/22 at 2:29 PM -09/22/22 at 11:58 AM -09/25/22 at 11:41 AM Showers: 09/24/22 at 12:48 AM No evidence of the bathing task was in the electronic medical record since 09/25/22. During an interview on 10/18/22 at 10:55 AM, the Director of Nursing (DON) stated that Resident #6 had showers scheduled on Wednesday and Saturday. She received her showers. The showers were documented…
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 | 3 of 5 | 3.2 | -0.2 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 2.7 | +0.3 vs chain |
| Staffing | 4 of 5 | 2.6 | +1.4 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 4.5 | -0.5 vs chain |
The other 109 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.2★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 109; lowest-rated first.
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| GROVES, DONNA | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 04/14/2023 |
| ROMEO, DOMINIC | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 04/01/2023 |
| STOLTZ, CHARLES | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 07/01/2022 |
| WILHEIM, RONALD | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 07/01/2022 |
| SENECA TRAIL MGT CO., LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 07/01/2022 |
| ANDERSON, CONSTANCE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 08/01/2023 |
| WILLIAMS, ANGEL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 07/01/2022 |
| ODENTHAL, RICHARD | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | since 07/15/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 12 rows in the source record cover these 8 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 88% 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 $870K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 10% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in WV
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the West Virginia Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 515188. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-03-11, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.