Home / West Virginia / Elkins
200 Whitman Avenue, Elkins, WV 26241 · Randolph County · (304) 636-2033
84 certified beds, about 79 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 2021
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 515197 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on March 6, 2025, inspectors cited 15 health deficiencies (the West Virginia average is 11.7, the national average 9.2).
None of its 74 health citations since July 2022 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy.
CMS lists no fines against this home in the last three years.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.51 hours per resident per day, against 3.67 across West Virginia and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.37 of those hours.
74.1% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (West Virginia average 44.1%).
CMS links it to Autumn Lake Healthcare, an affiliated group of 59 nursing homes.
Federal rules call for a standard inspection at least every 15 months, plus a visit whenever a complaint is filed. Each mark below is one citation, colored by how serious inspectors rated it. How to read a citation.
Under each citation, the quoted text is the inspector's own summary from the federal statement of deficiencies (CMS form 2567), word for word apart from a privacy scrub; CMS removes residents' and staff names before it publishes the text. The full notes are on Medicare.gov.
CMS rates every citation by how much harm it caused (rows) and how many residents it touched (columns). The count in each box is this home's, across all 74 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on policy review, staff interview and observation, the facility failed to maintain a clean, comfortable and home-like environment regarding odors in the facility. This failed practice had the potential to affect more than a limited number of residents. Facility Census: 74.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure complete and thorough investigations for alleged violations of resident to resident abuse and neglect were conducted. This failed practice had the potential to affect more than a limited number of residents. Resident Identifier: #29 and #84. Facility Census: 74. a) Resident #29 On 07/07/26, a Facility Reported Incident (FRI) #3017743 was reviewed. The facility did not thoroughly and completely investigate an incident of resident-to-resident abuse. Basic Information of the incident reported that a fellow resident bent and twisted Resident #29's finger at the dinner table and the residents were separated. On 05/15/26, Nurse Aide #1's statement included, While sitting at dining room table male resident grabbed resident (Resident #29) left pointer finger, twisted it and bent finger backwards. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to provide catheter care and services within accepted standards of practice. This deficient practice had the potential to affect one (1) of four (4) residents reviewed for the care area of urinary catheters. Resident identifier: #70. Census: 74.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview the facility failed to submit a five (5) day followup for a Facility Reported Incident as required. This was true for one (1) of two (2) incidents reviewed during this survey. Resident Identifier: #5 Facility Census: 76Findings Include:a) Resident #5On 12/29/25 at 3:03 PM record review of a Facility Reported Incident (FRI) found that the facility did not file a five-day follow-up to the investigation of this incident. On 09/18/25 at 2:30 PM the initial allegation of sexual abuse was reported to the appropriate facilities (Adult Protective Services, the Ombudsman and the Office of Inspector General). The facility investigated the allegation which was unverified. The resident was interviewed at the time of the investigation, however, she does not have capacity and reported that the incident happened months ago. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, policy review, and staff interview, the facility failed ensure catheter care was provided according to professional standards of practice. This failed practice was true for one (1) of one (1) residents observed for catheter care. Resident identifier: #62. Facility census: 83.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to follow Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) during urinary catheter care and wound care. This was true for one (1) of one (1) residents viewed for urinary catheter care and wound care. Resident identifier: #62. Facility census: 93.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interviews, the facility failed to established a grievance policy that meets essential requirements. Specifically, it failed to: Notify residents individually or provide clear postings throughout the facility about their right to file a grievance. The facility did not provide easy access to grievance forms. They facility did not notify residents of the right to file a grievance anonymously. Additionally, the facility did not provide easily accessible and clearly presented contact information for independent entities where grievances can be filed, such as the appropriate state agency, Quality Improvement Organization, State Survey Agency, and State Long-Term Care Ombudsman programs. Facility Census:
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure Resident's received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice. Resident #68's nebulizer treatment was left running for 20 minutes longer than it should have been. A resident was receiving oxygen at a rate that was not prescribed. Resident #22 did not receive blood sugar monitoring as required by physician order. Resident #28 was identified as a fall risk and had an order for their bed to be in the lowest posiotion did not have their bed in that position. Resident #85 had a seizure disorder and an intervention for padded side rails did not have padded side rails in place. Resident #8, #68, #22, #28, and #28. Facility census: 77.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to have Sufficient and Competent staffing due to the lack of RN coverage for eight (8) consecutive hours a day for eight (8) of eight (8) sampled days.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, and food tray temperatures the facility failed to serve food to residents that was at an appetizing temperature. This failed practice was true for one (1) of one (1) hallways tested for food tray temperatures throughout the Long-Term Care Survey Process. Facility census: 77.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and policy review, the facility failed to properly store food in accordance with professional standards. This is true for the facility kitchen and nourishment pantry. This had the potential to affect all residents in the facility. Facility census 77.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and staff interviews, the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections with regards to the water management, PPE, resident hand washing, resident's personal products and unsanitary practices. This practice had the potential to affect all residents that reside in the facility. Resident identifiers: #26, #24, #30, #40, #46, #53, #70, #74, and #285. Facility census: 72.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and staff interview, the facility failed to allow residents to have a dignified existence related to having an uncovered catheter bag. This failed practice was a random opportunity of discovery. Resident identifier: #23. Facility census:
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interviews, the facility failed to display notices regarding the availability of survey results, and the related plans of correction, in areas that are prominent and easily accessible to residents and their representatives. Facility census: 77.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to provide the required Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC) letter to one (1) of three (3) residents reviewed during the annual survey process. This failure placed residents at risk of not being informed of their rights prior to the end of Medicare Part A covered services. Resident identifiers: #333, #334, and #335. Facility census: 77. Findings Included: a) Resident #333 On 02/19/25 at 2:15 PM, a review was completed regarding the beneficiary protection notification liability notices given for the following resident: Resident #333 began Medicare Part A skilled services on 01/07/25. The last covered day of Part A service was 02/08/25. There was no evidence that a NOMNC form was provided. Review of the social worker's social service notes to Resident # 333's daughter, dated 02/06/25, verified a planned discharge. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and staff interview, the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment. Resident #34's bathroom wall was not in good repair. This was a random opportunity for discovery. Resident identifier: #34. Facility census: 77.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the resident's Pre-admission Screening (PAS) was updated after a new diagnosis. This was true for two (2) out of three (3) residents reviewed for the category of PASARR (Pre-admission Screening and Record Review, during the Long-Term Care Survey Process. Resident identifiers: #23, #28 and #27. Facility census: 77.
Inspectors wroteBased on resident interview, staff interview and record review the facility failed to provide evidence that residents were invited to care plan meetings in order to participate in planning for her their own care. This was true for Resident #15. Facility census: 77.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, staff interviews, and record review, The facility failed to ensure two (2) of two (2) resident environments were free from accident hazards for which it had control. Resident identifiers: #23 and #34. Facility census: 77.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and staff interview the facility failed to ensure the updated staffing information was posted. Facility census: 77.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and staff interview it was determined that the facility failed to ensure they disposed of garbage and refuge properly. The facility failed to ensure garbage and refuse containers were in good condition and waste was properly contained in dumpsters or compactors with lids or otherwise covered. This practice had the potential to affect more than an isolated number of residents. Facility census: 77.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to implement the care plan intervention of weekly skin evaluations for Resident #30, #76, #18 and #75. This was true for four (4) of five (5) residents reviewed during the survey process. Resident Identifiers: #30, #76, #18 and #75. Facility Census: 82. Findings Include: a) Resident #30 On 11/26/24 at 10:00 AM, a record review was completed for Resident #30. The review found the care plan had not been implemented regarding weekly skin evaluations. The following dates of the completed skin evaluations have greater than seven (7) days in between weekly skin evaluations: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to follow physician's orders regarding weekly skin evaluations for four (4) of five (5) residents reviewed for quality of care. Resident #30, #76, #18 and #75 were affected by this. Resident identifiers: #30, #76, #18, and #75. Facility Census: 82. Findings Included: a) Resident #30 On 11/26/24 at 10:00 AM, a record review was completed for Resident #30. The review found the physician's order regarding weekly skin evaluations had not been followed. The following dates of the completed skin evaluations have greater than seven (7) days in between weekly skin evaluations: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to provide an accurate and complete medical record for Resident #75, #30 and #18. This was true for three (3) of five (5) residents reviewed during the survey process. Resident Identifiers: #30, #75 and #18. Facility Census: 82. Findings Included: a) Resident #75 On 11/25/24 at 1:00 PM, a record review was completed for Resident #75. The review found the Physician Orders for Scope of Treatment (POST) form was incomplete. The preparer's signature and date were left blank. On 11/25/24 at 3:30 PM, Social Worker (SW) #48 confirmed the POST form was incomplete. b) Resident #30 On 11/25/24 at 1:15 PM, a record review was completed for Resident #30. The review found white correction fluid on the area of the physician's signature and the preparer's signature and date were left blank on the POST form. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and staff interview the facility failed to honor code status for one (1) of 23 residents reviewed. This is cited as past non compliance due to the facility's correction of the problem prior to the surveyors arrival at the facility. Resident identifier: #83. Facility census: 82.
Inspectors wroteBased on a complaint investigation conducted from 11/25/24 through 11/26/24. Record review, and interview, revealed that the facility failed to ensure that the physician reviewed and documented a response, to the irregularities noted by the consultant pharmacist. This was true for one (1) of six (6) resident records surveyed. Resident Identifier: #35.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to have sufficient nursing staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to provide nursing and related services to assure resident safety and attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident, as determined by resident assessments and individual plans of care and considering the number, acuity and diagnoses of the facility's resident population. This was true for five (5) of five (5) staff members reviewed for competencies. Facility census: 59. a) Nurse Aide (NA) #100 At approximately 5:00 PM on 02/21/24, a record review was conducted for the facility's staffing. During that review, it was determined NA #100 had not completed any competencies. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention program to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. The facility failed to provide appropriate infection surveillance, hand hygiene and catheter care. This failed practice had the potential to affect every resident currently residing in the facility. Resident Identifiers: #43 and #44. Facility census: 59.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure residents have a right to a dignified existence. The staff failed to knock on the door while Resident #44 was receiving catheter care and failed to ensure a dignifying dining service. These failed practices were random opportunities for discovery and had the potential to affect a limited number of residents that currently reside at the facility. Resident identifiers: #44. Facility census 59.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and resident and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure that each resident had reasonable and ready access to their personal funds held by the facility. This had the potential to affect more than a limited number of residents. Resident identifier: #43. Facility census: 59.
Inspectors wroteBased on resident interview and staff interview, the facility failed to review resident rights during the residents stay. This was a random opportunity for discovery during the Resident Council meeting and had the potential to affect all residents in the facility. Resident identifiers: #12, #22, #51, #169, #19, #41, #29, #46, #7, and #21. Facility census: 59.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure the facility had a clean comfortable homelike environment for all residents. This was a random opportunity for discovery and had the potential to affect a limited number of residents that currently reside at the facility. Facility census 59.
Inspectors wroteBased on facility documentation, staff interviews and written statements, the facility failed to complete a thorough investigation of an allegation of neglect. This failed practice had the potential to affect more than a limited number of residents who currently reside in the facility. Resident identifiers: #21.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and/or implement a personalized comprehensive care plan for each resident. This included the care areas of implementing monitoring use of phsychotropic medications, oxygen care and indwelling Foley catheters. This was true for three (3) out of 17 residents reviewed for care plans and affected a limited number of residents Resident identifiers: #44, #43, and #13. Facility census 56.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, Facility policy, and staff interview, the facility failed to provide indwelling Foley catheter care at the current professional standard of practice. This is true for one (1) out of three (3) residents who had indwelling Foley catheters. Resident identifiers: #44, #43, and #13. Facility census 56.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to complete a performance review of every Nurse Aides at least once every 12 months, and provide regular in-service education based on the outcome of those reviews. This was true for three (3) out of (5) staff members reviewed for performance reviews during the long-term care survey process. Facility census: 59.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure all posted nurse staffing information was up-to-date and accurate. This was true for four (4) out of five (5) days reviewed for posted nurse staffing information during the long-term care survey process. Facility census: 59.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, and staff interview, the failed to have a pharmacist review each resident's medication regimen monthly in order to identify irregularities and maintain record of the identified irregularities and did not follow through with a regimen reccomendation. This was true for five (5) residents reviewed for unecessary medications. Resident identifiers: #24, #61 #44, #28 and #13. Facility census: 59.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and resident and staff interview, the facility failed to follow menus for meals and post accurate menus prior to mealtimes. This had the ability to affect more than a limited number of residents. Resident identifier: #16. Facility census: 59.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and staff interview, the facility failed to serve milk at appetizing temperature. This was a random opportunity for discovery and had the potential to affect a limited number of residents. Facility census:
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to maintain complete, accurate, and readily accessible medical records for each resident, by failing to include care plan meeting notes in the resident medical records. This was true for three (3) of three (3) residents reviewed for care plan meetings during the long-term care survey process. Resident identifiers: #57, #28,and #43. Facility census: 59.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to report accurate payroll-based journal information. This was true for five (5) of five (5) days reviewed during the long-term care survey process. This has the potential to affect more than a limited number of residents. Facility census: 59.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure Nurse Aides (NA) received the required 12 hours of training each year. These training's needed to include dementia training, abuse prevention training, areas of weakness as determined in performance reviews, facility assessment, special needs of residents determined by facility staff, and care of the cognitively impaired resident for those NA's providing care for individuals with cognitive impairments. This was true for three (3) of five (5) NA's reviewed for yearly in-services. Facility census: 59.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure that the resident's Pre-admission Screening (PAS) reflected pre-admission diagnoses for two (2) of two (2) residents reviewed for the category of Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR), during the long-term care survey. Resident identifiers: #31 and #28. Facility Census 59. Findings Included: a) Resident #31 On 02/20/24, a record review of the resident's electronic medical record (EMR) revealed the resident's most recent PAS, dated 11/03/23, indicated no level II not required. The record also revealed the resident had a developmental disability diagnosis of Moderate Intellectual Disabilities on admission [DATE]. The resident did not receive a new PAS to address whether specialized services were needed. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and interview, the facility failed to revise a person-centered comprehensive care plan. The facility failed to revise care plans for ambulation. This practice affected one (1) of seventeen (17) resident's care plans reviewed during the Long-Term Care Survey Process (LTCSP). The failure to ensure the comprehensive care plan was reviewed and revised for the resident's highest practicable well-being placed the residents at risk of not receiving services that would meet their desires or wants and a decreased quality of life. Resident Identifier #61. Facility census: 59.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and staff interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #44 received the necessary services to maintain good grooming and personal hygiene. This was a random opportunity for discovery and had the potential to affect a limited number of residents that currently reside in the facility. Facility census 56.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, policy review, and staff interview, the facility failed to complete neurological assessments after an unwitnessed fall. This was true for one (1) of one (1) residents reviewed for neurological (neuro) assessments during the long-term care survey process. Resident identifier: #57. Facility census: 59.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and resident and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure each resident receives necessary respiratory care and services in accordance with professional standards of practice, the resident's care plan, and the resident's choice, by failing to change the O2 tubing and humidifier for Resident #43 per orders. Resident Identifier: #43. Facility census: 59.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to adequately document mood and behaviors for the use of psychotropic medications and failed to attempt a gradual dose reduction. This failed practice was true for two (2) out of five (5) reviewed in the care area of unnecessary medications. Resident identifier: #44, and #28. Facility census: 56.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure there were no expired medications in the medication refrigerator on the South Hall. This failed practice had the potential to affect a limited number of residents. Facility census: 59.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure two (2) of 22 residents reviewed during the long-term care survey process had a Physician Orders for Scope of Treatment (POST) form completed correctly. Additionally, the facility failed to ensure three (3) of 22 residents or their legal representative were informed of his or her right to develop an advance directive. Resident identifiers: #1, #25, #30, #37, and #44. Facility census: 65.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident fall resulting in serious bodily injury and two (2) resident-to-resident physical altercations were reported in a timely manner to the appropriate state agencies. Resident identifiers: #266 and #1. Facility census: 65.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and interview, the facility failed to develop person-centered comprehensive care plans. The facility failed to develop care plans for dialysis care, a skin condition, loss of dentures, meal supervision, safety alarms, and an indwelling urinary catheter. This practice affected five (5) of (22) resident's care plans reviewed during the Long-Term Care Survey Process (LTCSP). The failure to ensure the comprehensive care plan was developed for the resident's highest practicable well-being placed the residents at risk of not receiving services that would meet their desires or wants and a decreased quality of life. Resident Identifiers: #19, #6, #28, #37, and #18. Facility census: 55.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to revise care plans for a resident with weight loss, a resident with a fall and effectiveness of staff interventions with a resident with behaviors. This was true for three (3) of 22 sample residents reviewed for care plans. Resident identifiers: #28, #11, #1. Facility census: 65.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation and interview, the facility failed to have accurate or follow orders for residents with wander guard, special diet orders, contact precautions, oxygen saturation monitoring and weekly weights. These failed practices had the potential to affect more than a limited number of residents reviewed in survey sample. Resident identifiers #54, #50, #37, #48, #25,#51, #15, #31, #18 #26.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and staff interview, the facility failed to label and store all medications according to acceptable standards of practice. Three (3) of four (4) residents receiving insulin did not have the insulin dated as to when the insulin was opened. Medication refrigerators failed to have evidence of refrigerator temperatures being monitored daily. Resident identifiers: #35 #62, # 50 and #3. Facility census: 65.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to have complete, accurate, and readily accessible medical record, including documentation related to legal representation, and advanced directives (Physician Orders of Scope of Treatment or POST form) were not part of the resident's charts or readily accessible for all shifts. This failed practice had the potential to affect more than a limited number of residents. Resident identifiers #17, #51, #15, #43, #50, #48, #30, #1, and #25. Facility Census 65.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure a Resident's catheter bag was covered with a privacy bag. This was a random opportunity for discovery. Resident identifier #45. Facility census: 55.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident was provided a verbal and written description of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman program, the name of the Ombudsman, and contact information in a manner they understood. This had the potential to affect more than a limited number of residents. Resident identifiers: #33, #39, #316, #8, #49, and #16. Facility census: 65. a) Resident Council Meeting - Residents #33, #39, #316, #8, #49, and #16 During a resident council meeting, on 07/06/22 at 1:40 PM, six (6) out of six (6) residents were unable to report where (or if) the Ombudsman's contact information was posted within the facility. No one recognized the Ombudsman by name or by job description. Resident #11 stated, I didn't know someone like that existed or we could speak to someone else about the care we receive. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide the required Skilled Nursing Facility Advanced Beneficiary Notice of Non-Coverage (SNF-ABN) form to three (3) of three (3) residents reviewed for the facility's beneficiary protection notification. This failure placed residents at risk of not being informed of their rights prior to the end of Medicare Part A covered services. Resident identifiers: #35, #63, and #65. Facility census: 65.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to protect resident right to privacy and confidentiality for all aspects of care and services. Signs posted in resident rooms and visible to others included clinical and personal care information. Resident identifiers: #50 and #37. Facility census: 65.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to make prompt efforts to resolve a grievance and to keep the resident notified of progress toward resolution. This is true for two (2) of two (2) reviewed during the Long-Term Care Survey Process (LTCSP). Resident identifiers: #45 and #28. Facility census: 55. Findings Included: a) Resident #45 On 07/05/22 at 12:23 PM during an interview, Resident #45 stated that she doesn't sleep well, due to the Resident next-door yelling, all the time. She stated that she has talked to the social worker about the issue of the other Residents yelling. A record review on 07/06/22 of grievances, revealed no grievance form was filled out for this issue. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the direct monitoring and supervision provided during the use of physical restraint for a resident including documentation of the monitoring. This was true for one (1) of three (3) residents reviewed for physical restraint. Resident identifier: #43. Facility census: 65.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to complete thorough investigations of two (2) resident-to-resident physical altercations, maintain documentation that the incidents were thoroughly investigated, and report the results to Adult Protective Services and the State Survey Agency, within five (5) working days of the incidents in accordance with State law. Resident identifier: #1. Facility census:
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide wound care treatment order by the physician for Resident #18. This was true for one (1) of four (4) residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. Resident identifier: #18. Facility census: 65.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record review, and interview, the facility failed to deliver respiratory care services consistent with professional standards of practice. Oxygen supplies were not properly stored. This failed practice had the potential to affect a limited number of residents. Resident identifiers: #46, and #25. Facility census: 55.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to provide the necessary behavioral health care services to attain or maintain the highest practicable mental and psychosocial well-being. Resident identifier: #1. Facility census: 65.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure narcotics were reconciled per shift. This failed practice had the potential to affect a limited number of residents. Facility census: 65.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure Resident #54 was free from unnecessary medications. This was true for one (1) of five (5) reviewed for unnecessary medications. Resident identifier #54. Facility census: 55.
Inspectors wroteBased on resident interview, staff interview, and medical record review, the facility failed to obtain needed dental services when Resident #28 had missing dentures. This failed practice had the potential to affect a limited number of residents. Resident identifier: #28. Facility census: 65.
Inspectors wroteBased on resident interview, record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to provide a resident with a peanut allergy an alternative nourishing snack when other residents were receiving peanut butter cookies for the bedtime snack. This practice had the potential to affect a limited number of residents. Resident identifier #33. Facility census: 65.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to provide appropriate assistive devices to residents who need them to maintain or improve their ability to eat independently. This failed practice had the potential to affect a limited number of residents. Resident #46. Facility census: 55.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to keep soiled cloths in sanitized bucket and failed to label and date food upon opening or use. This failed practice had the potential to affect a limited number of residents who receive nutrients from the kitchen.
Inspectors wroteBased on facility documentation and interview, the facility failed to ensure current staff were fully COVID-19 vaccinated. This was true for one (1) of eight (8) staff members reviewed for compliance with COVID-19 vaccinations. Facility Census: 65. Findings Included: a) Staff Covid-19 Vaccinations A review of the facility's Infection Control practices found the facility was unable to provide the required evidence of staff Covid-19 completed vaccination in a two-dose series for Nurse Aide (NA) #9. Continued review of facility documentation found NA #9's first vaccine was administered on 05/27/22. There was no evidence the second dose was administered. During an interview on 07/12/22 at 11:36 AM, the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) stated that NA #9 was only partial vaccinated. The ADON stated they missed the second dose of the two-dose series. [...]
13 fire safety citations on file: 6 on March 6, 2025, 7 on February 22, 2024.
CMS lists no fines or payment denials against this home in the last three years. The national average is 0.9 fines per home.
Hours of care per resident per day, from the payroll records every home sends CMS. Higher means more staff time with each resident.
| Measure | This home | West Virginia | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 3.51 | 3.67 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.37 | 0.73 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.15 | 3.17 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.99 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.15 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 74.1% | 44.1% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 50.0% | 42.3% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 4.06 hours a day for residents as sick as this home's (its case-mix figure). The staffing star compares the two.
Every nursing home sends CMS its staff hours for each day (the Payroll Based Journal). Here they are added up by quarter. The latest quarter is the one behind the figures above. In January to March 2026, nursing staff hours per resident were 3.66 on weekdays and 3.15 on weekends, 14% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 54.8% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.44 in April to June 2025 to 3.51 in January to March 2026.
| Quarter | All nursing staff | Registered nurses | Weekdays | Weekends | Contract staff share | Days with no RN hours | Residents a day |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.51 | 0.37 | 3.66 | 3.15 | 54.8% | 0 of 90 | 79 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.56 | 0.39 | 3.76 | 3.04 | 61.5% | 0 of 92 | 81 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.44 | 0.30 | 3.66 | 2.89 | 58.2% | 0 of 92 | 82 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.44 | 0.27 | 3.60 | 3.04 | 54.0% | 0 of 91 | 80 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| West Virginia, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.56 | 0.67 | 3.75 | 3.08 | 3.9% | 0.2% of days |
Hours per resident per day: staff hours in the quarter divided by resident days (the daily census CMS derives from resident assessments). Registered nurses include the director of nursing and RNs with administrative duties; aides include nurse aides in training and medication aides, as in CMS's own staffing measure. How these are calculated.
Staff pay reports
No staff pay figure for this home has passed review yet. A figure appears only after at least 5 reports from at least 3 different people, sent over at least 60 days, have passed review.
| Job | Median | Middle half | Employed |
|---|---|---|---|
| West Virginia, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $17.66 | $17.05 to $18.47 | 9,390 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $26.61 | $23.71 to $29.47 | 6,050 |
| Registered nurses | $38.52 | $32.77 to $47.97 | 23,430 |
| United States, nursing care facilities | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $20.67 | $17.91 to $22.55 | 534,270 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $33.86 | $30.05 to $37.40 | 188,210 |
| Registered nurses | $41.11 | $37.85 to $47.68 | 142,270 |
Hourly wages; the middle half runs from the 25th to the 75th percentile. Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, May 2025. BLS has no separate estimate for medication aides. These are survey estimates for whole occupations, not figures for any one home.
The measures CMS uses for the quality star. Lower is better for every one of them.
| Measure | This home | West Virginia | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 9.2 | 14.7 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 0.4 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.6 | 1.6 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.6 | 4.4 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 1.1 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 9.1 | 15.9 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.6 | 4.2 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 57.7 | 13.4 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 22.4 | 22.4 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 22.8 | 11.3 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 3.7 | 1.8 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 5.1 | 1.8 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Autumn Lake Healthcare at Crystal Springs's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (41.6% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
41.6% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · West Virginia: 9 better, 28 worse
Rate of successful return to home or community from a SNF (risk-standardized discharge to community rate). Higher is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 41 eligible stays.
9.7% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · West Virginia: 0 better, 0 worse
Rate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 46 eligible stays.
7.0% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 7.1% · West Virginia: 0 better, 2 worse
Percentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2023 to September 2024. 29 eligible stays.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Median of homes: West Virginia50.0% · US 56.6%
Percentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 17 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: West Virginia1.2% · US 0.0%
Percentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay. Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 25 residents counted.
4.6% this home
Median of homes: West Virginia2.4% · US 1.7%
Percentage of residents with pressure ulcers or pressure injuries that are new or worsened (adjusted rate). Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 25 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Median of homes: West Virginia97.6% · US 98.7%
Percentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 7 residents counted.
Source: CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program - Provider Data, released 2026-09-30. Better, no different and worse are CMS's own comparisons with the national rate, after adjusting for how sick residents were. Medians of homes and the state counts are worked out by us from the same file.
Legal business name: 200 WHITMAN AVENUE OPCO LLC. CMS links this home to Autumn Lake Healthcare, a group of 59 nursing homes averaging 2.9 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nellas Opco Holdco LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 06/01/2021 |
| A & R Stern Family Wv Holdings LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 99% | 06/01/2021 |
| Schwartz, Mark | Corporate officer | Individual | 06/01/2021 | |
| Chua, Catherine | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 02/01/2024 | |
| Holicker, Rose | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 11/30/2023 | |
| Schwartz, Mark | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 06/01/2021 | |
| A & R Stern Family Wv Holdings LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 06/01/2021 | |
| A Stern Family Trust Wv | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 06/01/2021 | |
| Accurate Staffing LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 06/01/2021 | |
| Brand Sonnenschine LLP | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 06/01/2021 | |
| R Stern Family Trust | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 06/01/2021 | |
| Chua, Catherine | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 02/01/2024 | |
| Holicker, Rose | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 11/30/2023 | |
| Stern, Aryeh | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 06/01/2021 |
As listed in the CMS ownership file, which names owners with a 5% or greater stake and the people and companies with operational or managerial control.
Chosen from this home's own inspection record.
These are the official offices in West Virginia. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.