Princeton Health Care Center
315 Courthouse Rd., Princeton, WV 24740 · Non profit - Corporation · 120 certified beds · (304) 487-3458 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (25% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited May 2024
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (39) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (1/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 1 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 | 1 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 1 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 1 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 2 to 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 25.4% | 14.7% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 4.8% | 6.3% | 5.4% | better |
| 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 | 2.5% | 1.6% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 5.6% | 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 | 4.9% | 4.4% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 27.4% | 15.9% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 33.8% | 27.0% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 97.6% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.5% | 4.2% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 20.2% | 22.1% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 17.9% | 13.4% | 17.1% | typical |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 3.3% | 1.0% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 24.4% | 22.5% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 26.5% | 11.3% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 3.34 | 1.80 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 3.91 | 1.84 | 1.80 | worse |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
31.4% 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 38 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 46.0% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 37 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.27 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 40% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 18% 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 | 31.4%CMS range 21.9–51.9 | 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 | 12.1%CMS range 8.1–16.8 | 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 | 46.0% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 46.0% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 48.6% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 1.9% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 3.9% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.1%CMS range 4.5–13.6 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.00 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 120 beds and averages 113.4 residents a day — about 94% occupied, or roughly 7 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.25 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.58 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.71 is at or above 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 3.44 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.58 on weekdays — 25% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.73 to 0.20 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 25% is below the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
39 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 29 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · E2026-02-05 · tag F0807 — failed to offer suitable drinks — patternEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides drinks consistent with resident needs and preferences and sufficient to maintain resident hydration.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure water and other liquids consistent with residents' needs and preferences were provided at bedside. This failed practice had the potential to affect more than a limited number of residents.Resident Identifiers: #10, #13, #39, #49, #81, #103, and #113. Facility Census: 110. Findings included: a) On 02/02/26, Resident #103 had no drinks at bedside. The resident stated, I'm burning up. I need a drink. Please .I need a drink. On 02/02/26 at 03:20 PM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #87 confirmed the resident had no drinks at bedside and stated, I'll bring her a drink. Resident #10 had no water pitcher or [NAME] Cup at bedside. LPN #87 confirmed there were no drinks at the resident's bedside for the resident or the roommate and stated, I will get them drinks. At 01:00 PM , Nursing Assistant (NA) #9 confirmed there was no water or water pitcher at bedside and reported they would get the water in [NAME] Cups for the following residents: Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-02-05 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, staff interview and observation, the facility failed to ensure dishes were cleaned under sanitary conditions in accordance with professional standards This failed practice had the potential to affect more than a limited number of residents. FACILITY:FACILITY. Facility Census: 110 Findings included: a) The following are general recommendations according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Services, FDA Food Code for each method. High Temperature Dishwasher (heat sanitization): Wash - 150-165 degrees F; Final Rinse - 180 degrees F. b) The facility's policy stated, The dish machines will be checked prior to meals to assure proper functioning and appropriate temperatures for cleaning and sanitizing. The procedure included, Prior to use, proper temperatures and/or chemical concentrations and machine function should be verified. c) At 02/04/2026 at approximately 10:00 AM, the dishwasher temperatures were were observed during three cycles. The temperatures for the wash cycle ranged from 160-162 degrees Fahrenheit and the rinse cycles…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-02-05 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — patternSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to maintain accurate and complete clinical records related to treatment documentation for two (2) of two (2) resident reviewed for brace use and one (1) resident for weight documentation. This failed practice had the potential to affect more than a minimal number of residents during the long term care survey process. Resident Identifier: #92, #4, and #7. Facility census: 110a) Resident #7 On 02/05/26 at 10:25 AM, during the record review a weight was documented on 01/15/2026 for Resident #7 in the electronic medical record. Progress Notes dated 01/08/2025 and 01/19/2026 documented the resident had refused to be weighed in January 2026.The Dietary Manager (DM) confirmed the progress note with weight refusal and the documented weight logged in the resident's electronic medical record The DM reported the resident was marked as refused in her note and on her weight sheet. The DM stated, I don't know how they got that weight. I have on my copy and note he refused . Not sure why that weight is in there. 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 · Ecited before2026-02-05 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and staff interview the facility failed to maintain an infection control program to aid in preventing the spread of disease. This failed practice was a random opportunity for discovery and had the potential to affect more than a limited number of residents during the Long-Term Care Survey Process. Facility census: 110. Findings Include: a) Resident hand hygiene An observation of the noon time meal on 02/02/25 being served on 300 hall, revealed that room [ROOM NUMBER] thru #306 were served their lunch tray and no hand hygiene had been performed on the residents before eating their meal. During an interview on 02/02/25 at 1:10 PM, Nursing Assistant (NA) # 35 stated, We usually do wash their hands, but no I did not do it today. Now the one I just served I was gonna wash hers at the sink Further observation showed that the resident's hands NA #35 was going to wash at the sink, and was sitting in bed with her tray in front of her. b) Hall 200 ice pass On 02/02/26 during Lunch tray pass 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 before2026-02-05 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive, person-centered care plan that provided sufficient and specific instructions to guide staff in the use of a prescribed splint/brace for Resident #92. This was a random opportunity for discovery and had the potential to affect more than a minimal number of residents residing in the Long Term Care Facility. Resident identifier:#92 Facility Census: 110 Findings include:Record review completed on 02/04/26 of the Care Plan Report revised 01/23/2026 identified multiple interventions related to splint/brace use, including ~monitoring effectiveness~ provide Range of Motion (PROM)prior to application~ observing for redness or skin breakdown~ washing hands prior to application of a hand splint~ reporting concerns to nursing or restorative staff.Further record review revealed the care plan failed to identify the specific anatomical placement/location of the splint/brace.The lack of clear placement instructions resulted in incomplete guidance for staff responsible for implementing the care…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-05 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to revise two (2) of 23 resident care plans when changes occurred. This deficient practice had the potential to affect two (2) of 23 residents reviewed in the long-term care survey sample. Resident Identifiers: #64 and #7. Facility Census: 110. Findings included: a) Resident #7 Resident #7's diet order stated, :Mechanical soft diet ground meats diet, Mechanical Soft texture, Nectar/Mildly Thick consistency two handled sip cup for sugar substitute. The resident's care plan stated, Mechanical soft ground meat nectar thick per order. and Staff to offer additional fluids such as jello, ice cream and popsicles. On 02/05/2026 at 10:47 AM, the Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed the care plan stated the resident was to have nectar thickened liquids, but additional fluids such as jello, ice cream and popsicles were recommended which are not considered thickened liquids. The DON confirmed the additional fluids were thinner than nectar consistency liquids, especially popsicles. According to the National Dysphagia Diet, a patient…
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 before2026-02-05 · 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 interview and resident interview the facility failed to provide care and services in accordance with professional standards of practice, by not applying devices ordered by the physician. This failed practice was found true for (2) two of (2) two residents reviewed for position and mobility during the Long-Term Care Survey Process. Resident identifiers: #4, and #92. Facility census: 110. .Findings include: a) Resident #4 The initial observation and interview with Resident #4 on 02/02/26 at 3:11 PM, revealed that Resident #4 had a contracture to the left hand. Resident #4 stated, I am supposed to have a carrot, but they don't always put it on. My boot for my right leg is broken and they have to order a new one. They do help when they are put on. A review on 02/04/25 at 9:42 AM, revealed that Resident #4 had the following orders: Right podus boot be worn for up to 6 hours on day shift apply carrot orthotic to the left hand for contracture every day shift. Further record review of the Treatment Administration Record (TAR), revealed that both…
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 · D2026-02-05 · 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 vaccines in accordance with professional standards of practice. This deficient practice had the potential to affect one (1) of five (5) residents reviewed for the care area of immunizations. Resident Identifier: #7. Facility Census: 110. Findings included: a) Resident #7 The facility's policy titled, Pneumococcal Vaccine with effective date 01/01/17 and revision date 10/10/23 stated it was the facility's policy to offer residents immunizations in accordance with current Centers for Disease Control (CDC) guidelines and recommendations. The policy also included the following recommendations for adults aged over [AGE] years old who received both pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV) 13 and pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPSV) 23, and the PPSV 23 was administered at age [AGE] or older, Together, with the patient, vaccine providers may choose to administer a single dose of PCV20 The interval should be five (5) years or more…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-05-08 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
The facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. The facility failed practice included: the missed opportunity for hand hygiene was true for 29 of 193 documented hand hygiene observations made by the facility and for 1 (one) of 32 observations made during a medication pass for the medication administration portion of the long term survey process. This failed practice had the potential to affect more than an isolated number of residents. Facility census: 114. Findings included: a) Facility On 05/07/24 at approximately 12:30 PM, a review of the facility Policy and Procedure titled, Infection Prevention and Control Program, section 4, Standard Precautions, dated 12/10/13 with a revision date of 05/18/23, noted the policy read, in part, Hand hygiene shall be performed in accordance with facility's established hand hygiene procedures. Further record review of the facility's Hand Hygiene Observation Tool…
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 · E2024-05-08 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — patternProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from abuse which included misappropriation of medication. This was true for three (3) of three (3) residents reviewed during the survey. Resident identifiers: #10, #20, #81. Facility Census: 114. This will be cited as past non compliance because the facility identified what had happened and took immediate steps to correct the failure to ensure it does not reoccur. All components of the of plan of correction were completed prior to this survey beginning. Findings included: a) Resident #10 Resident #10 had a narcotic medication borrowed for another resident five (5) times in the month of January, 2024. This was discovered when management performed an in house audit on 02/19/24. The facility reported it to the appropriate agencies on 02/19/24 and the five (5) day follow up was faxed on 02/22/24. The investigation started immediately on 02/19/24 at approximately 12:30 PM. A verbal and written statement was obtained from Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #104. The verbal statement relayed the nurse…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 29 citations
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-05-08 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — patternDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to revise the residents comprehensive care plan. Residents had one-on-one (1:1) interventions put in place without being care planned or being care planned timely. This was a random opportunity for discovery during the long term care survey process. Resident identifiers: #47, #75 and #101. Census: 114. Findings included: a) Resident #47 On 05/06/24 at 11:13 PM Resident #47 was observed to be sitting in her room with an apparent black eye. A staff member was observed at this time to be sitting in the room with the resident. On 05/07/24 at approximately 12:15 PM Resident #47 was observed to have a staff member sitting with her in her room. 05/07/24 at 07:45 PM during a medical record review, Resident #47 nursing note dated 05/03/24 identified that the resident had a fall as she was observed sitting in front of toilet in bathroom on floor, resident assessed for injuries noted to have skin tear to behind left ear and left side of face near chin, noted to have bump forming on top of left eyebrow noted to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-05-08 · tag F0675 — failed to support quality of life — patternHonor each resident's preferences, choices, values and beliefs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
The facility failed to create and sustain an environment that humanizes and individualizes each resident's quality of life as they were not provided a person-centered care to honor and support the residents individual preference, choices, values and beliefs. This was a random opportunity for discovery during the long term survey process. This had the ability to affect a limited number of resident's. Resident identifiers: #75, #47, #101. Facility census: 114. Findings include: a) During a facility tour on 05/06/24 at approximately 2:50 PM, it was noted Resident #75 had a Health Team Aide (HTA) sitting at her bedside. At that time, an interview with Resident #75 and the HTA #136 was conducted. HTA #136 revealed that she was providing one on one care to Resident #75 and that a HTA sat with Resident #75 24 hours a day providing this service. When asked why, HTA #136 responded, I am not sure, I think she had a fall a while back. HTA #136 was unable to tell me when the one on one was initiated or how long it was to continue. Resident #75 was unable to provide further information. 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 · E2024-05-08 · tag F0732 — patternPost nurse staffing information every day.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the Daily Staffing Posting information was accurate and current. The Daily Staffing Posting Form was not posted in a prominent place readily accessible to residents and visitors; the Daily Staffing Posting Form did not accurately reflect the direct care staff; and the Daily Staffing Posting Form did not identify the actual number of staff and or the actual hours worked. This was identified during the long-term care survey process of reviewing the sufficient and competent nursing staff. This has the potential to affect potential to affect more than a limited number of residents and visitors. Identifiers: Accurate and current data of direct care, Accurate and current date of actual numbers of staff and or the actual hours worked; and the Daily Staffing Posting Form was not posted in a prominent place readily accessible to residents and visitors. Facility Census: 114. Findings included: a) Accurate and current data- direct care staff On 05/07/24 at approximately 10:15 AM during a review of the Daily Staffing…
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 before2024-05-08 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and staff interview the facility failed to ensure cooking/serving pans were completely dry before storing them on the shelf wet nesting. Wet nesting occurs when wet dishes or pots and pans are stacked, preventing them from drying, and creating conditions that are ripe for microorganisms to grow. Hot/Cold compress pack was stored in the resident pantry refrigerator where cold snacks are stored. This failed practice was found during the initial kitchen tour during the Long-Term Care Survey and had the potential to affect more than a minimal number of residents residing in the facility. Facility Census: 114 Findings Include: a) wet nesting During the initial Kitchen tour on 05/06/24 at 11:00AM with Certified Dietary Manager (CDM) #132 Pans were stacked under the counter, when one was pulled it was observed to be wet on the right side. CDM #123 confirmed staff should have ensured pans were dry before stacking and storing them. On 05/06/24 at 1:00 PM CDM provided educations signed by staff ensuring dishes are dry when putting them up. b) Hot/Cold compress in pantry…
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 · D2024-05-08 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and staff interview the facility failed to provide a dignified dining experience by not serving residents sitting together at the same time. This was a random opportunity for discovery and had the potential to affect a minimal number of residents in the facility. Facility Census: 114 Resident Identifiers: #14, #52, #106 Findings Include: On 05/08/24 at 12:20 PM in the South Dining room Resident #52 and #106 were observed setting together and Table one (1) and Resident #14 observed setting to herself at Table two (2). Further observation on 05/08/24 at 12:25 PM revealed Resident #52 was served first at table one (1) then Resident #14 was served at table two (2) at 12:26 PM. Resident #106 waited Three minutes at table one(1) while Resident #52 ate. Resident #106 was served at 12:29 PM. Staff interview was conducted on 05/08/24 at 12:33PM with Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #168 asking why Resident #14 was served before Resident #106 CNA #168 stated because there was a mix up with the ticket and did not want Resident #14's food to get cold. During Staff…
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 · D2024-05-08 · 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 medical record review and staff interview the facility failed to ensure an informed consent was obtained for a psychotropic medication. This was true for one (1) of five (5) residents reviewed for unnecessary medication during the long term care survey. Resident identifier: #43 Census: 114. Findings included: a) Resident #43 On 05/07/24 at 12:50 PM during a medical record review for Resident #43, it was identified that the resident was prescribed aripiprazole 20 mg tablet for inappropriate sexual behaviors related to unspecified psychosis not due to a substance or known physiological condition. During this medical record review an informed consent for psychotropic medication use could not be identified for the use of aripiprazole 20 mg tablet. On 05/07/24 at approximately 2:45 PM during an interview with the Director of Nursing (DON), the DON agreed that the psychotropic medication aripiprazole 20 mg did not have an informed consent for psychotropic medication use and that she would have this corrected.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-08 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolatedKeep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review and staff interview the facility failed to ensure residents' information was protected. This failed practice was found true for (1) one of (1) one resident looked at for privacy during the Long-Term Care Survey Process. Resident Identifiers #19. Facility Census 114. Findings include: a) Resident #19 An observation on 05/06/24 at 11:15 AM, found a sign posted behind Resident #19's bed that read: (Resident # 19 name) has an allergy to Latex.} Further observation found that the sign was visible from the hallway when the door and curtain were open. A record review on 05/08/24 at 1:00 PM, revealed that Resident #19 was in fact allergic to Latex. On 05/08/24 at 2:30 PM, a review of the facilities policy titled {Confidentiality of Personal and Medical Records}, number (8) eight reads: Paper notes or reminders with resident's personal or medical information shall not be left unattended or viewable by unauthorized persons. During an interview on 05/08/24 at 4:00 PM, the Administrator confirmed that the sign infringed on Resident #19's privacy.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-08 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and staff interviews the facility failed to provide a clean, comfortable, and homelike environment. A strong unpleasant odor was observed when entering a resident's room. This was a random opportunity for discovery during the long-term care survey process. Room Identifier: room [ROOM NUMBER]. Census: 114. Findings included: a) room [ROOM NUMBER] During a tour of the 200 hall on 05/06/24 at approximately 11:15 AM a strong unpleasant odor was observed when entering room [ROOM NUMBER]. During a tour of the 200 hall on 05/06/24 at 03:05 PM a strong unpleasant odor was again observed when entering room [ROOM NUMBER]. Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #91 was asked to help identify the odor in the room. LPN #91 stated that one of the residents will place her soiled undergarments in bags and put them in drawers and that may be what the smell is. She stated she would have the staff help check for what the odor is from and get it cleaned up. During a tour of the 200 hall on 05/07/24 at 09:06 AM a strong…
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 · D2024-05-08 · 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on Record review and staff interview the facility failed to notify the Ombudsman of resident #45's discharge to the hospital.This was true for one (1) of one(1) residents reviewed for the carrier of hospitalization. Resident identifier; #45. Facility census: 114. Findings include: A) Resident #45 A record review found The resident was discharged to the hospital 12/06/2024 at 12:48 pm. Interviewed Social Worker on 05/06/2024 to ask if the ombudsman was notified of resident discharge to the hospital and she said yes but could not provide verification of that notification.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-08 · tag F0644 — isolatedCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
The facility failed to coordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review (PASARR) program under Medicaid. The PASARR was not resubmitted for residents with newly evident or possible serious mental disorder. This was true for two (2) of six (06) residents PASARR reviewed during the long term care process. This had the ability to affect a limited number of residents. Resident Identifier: Resident #67, Resident #80; Census: 114. Findings Included: a) Resident #67 During a medical record review on 05/07/24 at 11:02 AM for Resident #67, the PASARR was dated 05/04/22. Further record review of the residents diagnosis identified an updated diagnosis of delusions due to known physiological condition dated 5/06/22. No further PASARR's were identified to have been completed for this diagnosis dated 05/06/22. On 05/07/24 at 02:46 PM during an interview with Social Worker #129 she stated she did not have an updated PASARR for the diagnosis of delusions due to known physiological condition dated 5/06/22 and that she would need to complete one.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-08 · tag F0645 — isolatedPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to ensure a resident's Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) reflected the diagnoses sheet for pre admission diagnoses. This was true for two (2) of five (5) residents reviewed for the PASARR care area. Resident identifiers: #80, #1, Facility Census: #114 Findings included: (a) Resident #80 During a record review on 05/07/24, Resident #80's medical record revealed admitting diagnosis for 06/16/22 (admission date) included the following: -unspecified Psychosis not due to a substance or known physiological condition According to the Diagnosis Report provided by the facility and the PASARR submitted 10/12/22 the PASARR did not reflect this admitting medical diagnosis. In an interview with the Social Services/Admissions Director #129 on 05/08/24 at 08:39 AM, it was verified the PASARR should have reflected the Psychosis Disorder upon the admission date of 06/16/22.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-08 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to develop a complete and accurate comprehensive care plan for two (2) of 34 residents reviewed in the long-term care survey sample. Resident identifiers: #115, #67. Facility census: 114. Findings included: a) Resident #115 Review of Resident #115's comprehensive care plan showed the resident had been living at the facility since 2022. On 02/15/24, the resident was discharged to a family members' home. The resident had diagnoses of traumatic brain disorder and dementia. A physician's note written on 02/12/24 indicated the resident had received discharge planning and assistance from a state agency. The discharge summary written on 02/15/24 indicated delivery of durable medical equipment and home health agency visits were arranged prior to discharge. An appointment was also made with the resident's primary care provider and an Adult Protective Services (APS) referral was made. Review of Resident #115's comprehensive care plan showed no focus was developed regarding discharge planning. A focus written on 11/17/22 and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-08 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
The facility failed to ensure that residents receive treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' choices. The facility failed to obtain the physicians order for one on one (1:1) interventions. This was a random opportunity of discovery during the long term care survey process. This had the ability to affect a limited number of residents. Resident Identifiers; Resident #47, Resident #75, and Resident #101. Facility Census: 114. Findings Included: a: Resident #47 On 05/06/24 at 11:13 PM Resident #47 was observed to be sitting in her room with an apparent black eye. A staff member was observed at this time to be sitting in the room with the resident. On 05/07/24 at approximately 12:15 PM Resident #47 was observed to have a staff member sitting with her in her room. 05/07/24 at 07:45 PM during a medical record review, Resident #47 nursing note dated 05/03/24 identified that the resident had a fall as she was observed sitting in front of toilet in bathroom on floor, resident assessed for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-08 · tag F0699 — isolatedProvide care or services that was trauma informed and/or culturally competent.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview the facility failed to provide services for Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome (PTSD). This failed practice was found true for (1) one of (3) three residents looked at for mood and behavior during the Long-Term Care Survey Process. Resident identifier #76. Facility Census: 114. Findings included: a) Resident # 76 A record review on 05/06/24 at 1:06 PM, of the Minimum Data Set (MDS), Section I, revealed that Resident #76 had PTSD. A record review on 05/08/24 at 11:00 AM, revealed the following trauma related care plan initiated on 10/31/21: Focus: (Resident #76 name) has a Trauma history relating to a car accident that left him badly injured 12 years ago. He has had two major strokes and two brain aneurysms. He lost his son due to a heart attack three years ago. He has a strained relationship with his living son and is close with a grandson. He worked as a social worker for many years at DHHR. No triggers reported. Goal: (Resident #76 name) will not have an increase in adverse symptoms related to trauma history through next review.…
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 · D2024-05-08 · tag F0770 — failed to provide lab services — isolatedProvide timely, quality laboratory services/tests to meet the needs of residents.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to obtain laboratory services as ordered by the physician. This deficient practice had the potential to affect one (1) of five (5) residents reviewed for the care area of unnecessary medications. Resident identifier: #80. Facility census: 114. Findings included: a) Resident #80 Review of Resident #80's physician's orders showed an order for the laboratory test hemoglobin A1c (HgbA1-c ) to be performed every six (6) months. HgbA1-c testing measures the average blood sugar level over the past three (3) months. Resident #80 was on a medication, Ziprasidone (Geodon) for psychosis, that can elevate blood sugar levels. Review of Resident #80's laboratory results showed HgbA1-c testing had last been performed on 09/07/23. On 05/08/24 at 1:17 PM, the Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed Resident #80's HgbA1-c testing had not been performed every six (6) months as ordered. She stated a HgbA1-c test would be obtained for the resident today. No further information was provided through the completion of the survey.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-08 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on Record review and staff interview the facility failed to ensure that the medical record contained the diagnosis of Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome (PTSD) as indicated on the Minimum Data Set (MDS) and that the Physician Order for Selective Treatment (POST) form was complete and accurate. This failed practice was found true for (2) two of 34 residents reviewed for medical record accuracy during the Long-Term Care Survey Process. Resident identifiers #76, #86. Facility Census 114. Findings include: a) Resident #76 A record review on 05/08/24 at 10:19 AM, revealed that Resident #76's MDS with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 03/22/24, Section I, question 16100, is marked yes for PTSD. Further record review showed that Resident #76 did not have PTSD listed for one of his medical diagnoses. He did however; have a care plan for trauma. During an interview on 05/08/24 at 1:30PM with the Director of Nursing (DON), she confirmed that resident #76's MDS was marked for PTSD and it was not on the current diagnosis list. She further stated, I will see what is going on with that. No…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-07-25 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — patternHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, policy review, resident council meeting and staff interview the facility failed to make grievances forms accessible to all resident and/or residents family/representatives residing in the facility. This had the potential to affect an unlimited amount of residents living in the facility. Facility census: 115. Findings Included: a) Grievance Forms A review of the facility policy titled Resident and Family Grievances and Communicated Concern with an implementation date 11/28/16 and a revision date 07/17/21, read as follows. Procedure: .8. A grievance may be filed anonymously During the Long Term Care Survey Process from 07/23/23 to 07/25/23 many observations throughout the facility revealed no evidence of grievance forms made accessible to the residents and/or resident representatives. During the Resident Council Meeting held on 07/25/23 at 10:08 AM, the Residents as a group were asked the question, Do you know how to file a grievance? Do you know where to access your grievance forms? The residents as a group stated No, we don't. We just tell Social Worker # 119…
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 before2023-07-25 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — patternProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, observation and staff interview the facility failed to ensure four (4) of 26 Residents reviewed received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' choices. A surgical consult was not scheduled for Resident #55 as directed by the nurse practioner, Resident #68's medication was not provided timely, an enteric coated medication was crushed before being administered, and blood pressures were not obtained as ordered by the physician for Resident #102. Resident identifiers: #55, #68, and #102. Facility census: 115. Findings included: a) Resident #55 Record review on 07/24/23 found Resident #55 had an ultrasound of her gallbladder on 01/18/23. The results of this ultrasound found: Gallbladder sludge is noted. No gallbladder wall thickening. No pericholecystic fluid. The results of the ultrasound were reviewed by the Family Nurse Practioner (FNP) on 01/19/23. The FNP wrote on the consult to get a surgical consult for the abnormal ultrasound with Gallbladder sludge. 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 · E2023-07-25 · tag F0924 — patternPut firmly secured handrails on each side of hallways.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY . Based on observations and staff interviews the facility failed to assure handrail were firmly secured and affixed to the corridor walls. This was a random opportunity for discovery and had the potential to affect more than a limited number of residents residing on North Unit 100 Hall. Facility Census: 115 Findings Included: a) Handrails During a tour on 07/24/23 at 1:11 PM this surveyor discovered on 100 Hall the following handrails were not firmly secured and affixed to the corridor walls. -The handrail between room [ROOM NUMBER] and the chapel door -Two (2) handrail between the 113 and the chapel door -The handrail between room [ROOM NUMBER] and 110 -The handrail between room [ROOM NUMBER] and 109 -The handrail between room [ROOM NUMBER] and 107 During an interview 07/24/23 at 1:20 PM, the Administrator acknowledged the rails were not secure and needed repaired. .
- Potential for harm · D2023-07-25 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to report an injury of unknown origin to the proper authorities for Resident #72. This was true for one (1) of two (2) residents reviewed for unsafe wandering. Resident identifier: #72. Facility census: 115. Findings included: a) Resident #72 Record review found the following nursing note dated 06/13/23 at 6:47 AM: When a staff member was dressing the resident, he noticed bruising to her left arm and left outer hip that he had not noticed the bruising throughout the night. Upon inspection, the resident had a large bruise on her upper left arm measuring 5 cm (centimeters) wide x 4 cm long, as well as a small bruise to her left outer hip measuring 4 cm wide x 2 cm long. Both bruises were deep purple and yellow in color. The Resident was unable to give a description. Vital signs were assessed and all were found to be within normal limits. The Resident is not displaying any signs or symptoms of pain or discomfort to the site at this time. No swelling or redness to surrounding skin noted, skin is intact. Review of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-07-25 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY . Based on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to accurately code the Minimum Data Set for resident's diagnosis. This was true for two (2) of five (5) reviewed for unnecessary medications. Resident identifiers: #49 and #79. Facility census: 115. Findings included: a) Resident #49 Review of Resident #49's medical records found the resident had been in the hospital from [DATE] through 07/12/23. She was treated for community acquired pneumonia and a urinary tract infection (UTI). Resident is currently on antibiotics for the treatment of pneumonia. Review of the MDS with a reference date (ARD) of 07/17/23 under section I (current diagnosis) did not have pneumonia or UTI in the last 30 days marked. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 07/25/23 at 2:10 pm. She confirmed the MDS with ARD of 07/17/23 was inaccurate. She confirmed the resident was treated in the hospital for a UTI and pneumonia and continued currently on antibiotics for treatment of pneumonia. b) Resident #79 Review…
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 · D2023-07-25 · tag F0642 — isolatedEnsure a qualified health professional conducts resident assessments.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, 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 complete a Minimum Data Set (MDS) when the resident was admitted to the hospital. Resident identifier: #53. Facility census: 115. Findings include: a) Resident #53 Review of Resident #53's medical record found she was admitted to the hospital on [DATE]. No MDS discharge tracking could be found. Interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 07/24/23 at 11:00 am. She confirmed a discharge MDS tracking form was not completed on 05/0/23.
- Potential for harm · D2023-07-25 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY . Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to complete a baseline care plan for one (1) of two (2) newly admitted residents reviewed during the long term care survey. Resident identifier #366. Census 115. Findings Included: a) Resident #115 The surveyor requested copies of the resident's most recent minimum data set (MDS,) list of diagnoses, care plans, and Pre admission Screening (PAS) on 07/24/23. A record review of these records indicated the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnosis of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. The care plan received did not address either diagnosis. The PAS, dated 7/5/23, listed both diagnoses. The MDS is still in progress, therefore is not completed. The electronic medical record reviewed on 07/24/23 did not list either diagnoses under the Medical Diagnosis section, but the printed diagnosis list indicated the facility added both diagnoses on 07/24/23 to the list of the resident's diagnosis, with the onset date of 07/07/23. On…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-07-25 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, 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 develop a comprehensive care plan to include the diagnosis of pneumonia. Resident identifier: #49. Facility census: 115. Findings include: a) Resident #49 Review of Resident # 49's medical records show the resident was in the hospital from [DATE] through 07/12/23 and was treated for pneumonia and the resident continues medication for the treatment of pneumonia. Review of Resident #49's care plan did not have a care plan for pneumonia. An interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 07/24/23 at 11:00 am, confirmed the resident did not have a care plan for pneumonia. .
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-07-25 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, resident interview, and staff interview, the facility failed to update the care plans of two (2) of five (5) residents reviewed for the care area of nutrition after both residents had a weight loss and a diet change. Resident identifiers: #55 and #83. Facility census: 115. Findings included: a) Resident #55 Review of the medical record found a nutritional/dietary weight loss note, dated 7/19/2023. The Resident lost 8.4 pounds in 30 days, which was an 6.1% loss and an 11 pound weight loss in 90 days for a 7.8% weight loss. The resident receives a regular sugar substitute diet with fortified foods. On 7/11/23 the interdisciplinary team met to discuss a current weight of 130.2 pounds which was a 8.4 pound weight loss in 30 days a 6.10% weight loss and a 90 day weight loss of 7.8%. Fortified foods were added to lunch and dinner. On 07/24/23, the Registered dietician met with the Resident and added chocolate milk to her diet. Review of the current care plan, revised on 03/14/23, found the following focus/problem: (Name of Resident) has a potential to have weight…
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 · D2023-07-25 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on facility policy, observations, and staff interview the facility failed to ensure proper storage of Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (C-pap) while not in use. This was a random opportunity for discovery and has the potential to affect a limited number of residents who currently reside in the facility. Resident Identifiers: # 67, and #3. Facility census 115. Finding included: Facility Policy, titled, Continuous Positive Airway Pressure date of revision:06/15/17. *It is very important to keep the C-pap equipment and supplies clean. *Store in a plastic bag. a) Resident #67 Observation on 07/23/23 02:53 PM, found the C-pap mask was lying on top of personal items on the nightstand not in a bag. Observation on 07/24/23 at 10:15 AM, found the C-pap mask was placed on top of various items such as opened bags of chips, bottles of lotions, and soda bottles on the nightstand not in a bag. Observation on 07/2423 at 2:18 PM, found the C-pap mask was on the nightstand on top mingled with other things, not in a bag. During an observation on 07/25/23 at 9:56 AM, found the C-pap mask was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-07-25 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and staff interview, the facility failed to complete temperature logs for their reach-in refrigerator, reach-in freezer, walk-in refrigerator, walk-in freezer, and dishwasher. This has the potential to affect more than a limited number of residents at the facility. Facility Census 115. Findings Included: On 07/23/23 at 2:24 PM, the initial kitchen walk through occurred. [NAME] #34 was in charge of the kitchen that day due to it being a Sunday. Observation found the dishwasher temperature log did not have any documentation for the date of 07/22/23, on the afternoon section of the form. The reach-in refrigerator temperature log did not have documentation for 07/21/22, on the PM Time section of the form, or 07/22/23, for the PM Time section of the form. The reach-in freezer temperature log did not have documentation for 07/21/23, on the PM Time section of the form, or 07/22/23, on the PM Time section of the form. The walk-in refrigerator temperature log did not have documentation for 07/21/23, on the PM Time section of the form, or 07/22/23, on the PM Time section…
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 before2023-07-25 · 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, staff interview and record review the facility failed to maintain proper infection control standards during medication pass for Resident #8. This failed practice was a random opportunity for discovery and had the potential to affect only a limited number of residents. Resident identifier: #8. Facility census: 115. Findings included: During observation of medication pass for Resident #8 on 07/24/23 at 09:07 AM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #20 reached into Resident's medicine cup with her bare fingers, moved the pills around, and pulled out a Memantine capsule. LPN #20 then opened the Memantine capsule and sprinkled the contents into the medication pill crush pouch. LPN #20 stated, I have to crush her medications and mix them in in her protien smoothie to get her to take them. LPN #20 then proceeded to dump the remainder of the pills into the pill crush pouch, crushed the medications, and poured the contents into the Resident's protien smoothie. Record review of the facility's policy titled, Medication Administration revise date 01/01/23, showed that staff are…
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 · D2023-07-25 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — isolatedMake sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and staff interview the facility failed to make a call system accessible to the resident at each toilet and bath or shower facility, and should be accessible to a resident laying on the floor. This was a random opportunity for discovery. Resident Identifiers: Resident #90. Facility Census: 115. Findings Included: a) Bathroom Call Light During the initial tour of the facility on 07/23/23 at 3:23 PM the bathroom call system cord wrapped around the call system, not reaching the floor. During an interview on 07/23/23 at 3:26 PM Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #172 stated the cord is very tangled, she was unable to get it untangled and unable to get the cord to reach the floor. During another tour of the facility on 07/24/23 at 9:00 AM, the call light cord was wrapped around and was not accessible to the Resident if lying on the floor. During an record review on 07/24/23 at 11:00 AM, Resident #90's medical record revealed a care plan with an initiated date of 08/03/23, Focus: Resident #90's name is moderate risk for falls r/t(related to) Confusion. Resident #90 name…
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.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PRINCETON MEMORIAL HOSPITAL COMPANY | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 06/01/1981 |
| AKERS, JUDY | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 07/01/2024 |
| AUTREY, CHARLES | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 10/01/2020 |
| MARTIN, RON | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 03/19/2024 |
| OSBORNE, EVELYN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 10/01/2020 |
| SHREWSBURY, JANET | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 07/01/2024 |
| WEBB, MICHAEL | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 03/25/2018 |
| BAILEY, CHRISTIE | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 12/06/2004 |
| ODELL, STEPHANIE | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/01/2025 |
| WHITE, DUSTIN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 07/01/2022 |
| RAMAKRISHNAN, KARTHIK | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/01/2024 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 14 rows in the source record cover these 11 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
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 82% 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.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. 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, FY2024). 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 515187. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-02-05, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.