315 Field Street, Bremen, GA 30110 · Haralson County · (770) 537-4482
120 certified beds, about 97 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 1989
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 115431 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on September 11, 2025, inspectors cited 5 health deficiencies (the Georgia average is 5, the national average 9.2).
Of 30 health citations since July 2022, 3 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents.
CMS lists 1 fine totaling $8,948 in the last three years; the largest was $8,948, and the latest is dated April 15, 2025.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.35 hours per resident per day, against 3.56 across Georgia and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.24 of those hours.
61.5% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Georgia average 46.0%).
CMS links it to Cypress Skilled Nursing, an affiliated group of 5 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 30 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility policy titled, Transfer or Discharge, Preparing a Resident for, the facility failed to provide a 30-day notice to one of three residents (R) (R14). This deficient practice had the potential to place the resident and resident representative at risk of being uninformed about their rights related to being transferred to another facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility's policy titled, Administering Medications and the Standing Orders-Medication Protocols, the facility failed to ensure systems were in place to accurately document medication administration in the Medication Administration Record (MAR) for two of five residents (R) (R16 and R2) reviewed during medication administration. These deficient practices resulted in incomplete clinical records with the potential to negatively impact safety for R16 and R2.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility's policies titled Administering Medications, Medication and Treatment Orders, Insulin Administration, and package insert titled, Lantus (insulin glargine injection), the facility failed to ensure medications were administered accurately for four of 25 medication administration opportunities observed, resulting in a medication error rate of 16 percent. This deficient practice had the potential to adversely affect residents' clinical conditions.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interviews, and review of the facility policy titled Ice Machines and Ice Storage Chests, the facility failed to ensure the ice machine was maintained in a clean and sanitary condition. This deficient practice had the potential to place the 86 residents who received hydration and nutrition from the kitchen at increased risk of foodborne illness.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility policies titled Handwashing/Hand Hygiene and Handling of Linen, the facility failed to ensure infection control practices were followed during disposal of soiled items, resident equipment maintenance, during laundry processes, and during meal tray delivery. These deficient practices had the potential to place the residents residing in the facility at increased risk of infections due to cross-contamination. The facility census was 100. Findings Include: Review of the facility's undated policy titled “Handwashing/Hand Hygiene” revealed the “Policy Statement” stated, “This facility considers hand hygiene the primary means to prevent the spread of infections.” The “Policy Interpretation and Implementation” section included, “… 2. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, staff and resident interviews, record review, and review of the facility policies titled Resident Rights, Dining and Meal Service, and Quality of Life-Dignity, the facility failed to ensure that dining practices supported and maintained the dignity and person-centered preferences for two of 49 sampled residents (R) (R43 and R53). This deficient practice had the potential to place R43 and R53 at risk of a decreased sense of dignity, autonomy, and person-centered care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, staff interviews, and review of the facility's policy titled Hazardous Area, Devices, and Equipment, the facility failed to ensure an environment free from hazards in three of 30 rooms on the 100 Hall. This deficient practice had the potential to place the residents residing in the rooms at increased risk of exposure to harmful substances and items.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, record review, and review of the facility policy titled Dining and Meal Service, the facility failed to ensure one of 13 residents (R) (R117) with pureed diet orders was served a diet in accordance with the physician's orders. This deficient practice had the potential to place R117 at risk of medical complications and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observations, interviews, and a review of the facility policy titled Hot Beverage Policy, the facility failed to ensure that one of 14 sampled residents (R) (R4) was free from accident hazards. Harm was identified to have occurred on 11/12/2024 when staff served R4 hot liquids, which resulted in a second-degree burn.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and a review of the facility policy titled, Floor Care, the facility failed to ensure that the shower rooms were maintained in a clean condition and free from dark brown to black fuzzy and slimy substances on the walls in two of the two halls (Hall 100 and Hall 200).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure that the medical record documentation was completed and/or accurate for one of three residents (R) (R2) reviewed for pressure ulcers.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, staff interviews, and review of the facility policy titled, Water Temperatures, Safety of, the facility failed to maintain a safe, clean, comfortable, homelike environment related to water temperatures above 110 degrees Fahrenheit (F) on one of two wings in the facility affecting 27 resident rooms and the shower room, and failed to change bed linen for one resident (R) (R103). The deficient practice had the potential for water over 110 degrees F to cause skin burns.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review, staff interviews, and review of the facility policy titled, Oxygen (O2) Administration, the facility failed to administer O2 therapy as ordered for one of 20 residents (R) (R21) receiving O2 therapy. The deficient practice had the potential to place R21 at risk for medical complications, unmet needs, and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, document review, interviews, and a review of facility policy, the facility failed to protect two of two residents (R) (R#205 and R#98) from abuse from R#204. On 7/20/21, the psychiatrist indicated there was an alarming change in R#204's impulsivity and recommended staff should watch R#204 more carefully while the medications get stabilized. However, there was no documented evidence the facility increased the resident's supervision to protect residents. On 7/30/21, staff found R#204 hitting the resident's roommate (R#205) in the face with a fist. The facility implemented interventions including moving the resident's roommate; however, the facility failed to implement interventions to supervise R#204. Interviews with staff revealed R#204 had to be redirected from R#98's room and/or threatened the resident; however, no interventions were implemented to protect R#98. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a root cause was identified and person-centered interventions were developed after a fall for one of three sampled residents (R) (R#69) reviewed for falls. Specifically, R#69 had an unwitnessed fall in the resident's room on 4/2/22 and the root cause of the fall was not identified nor were new interventions developed. The resident experienced another unwitnessed fall in the resident's room on 6/27/22 and sustained a fracture to the left hand.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure that the staff designated as Dietary Manager (DM) was a Certified Dietary Manager (CDM) or had a similar food service management certification or degree. This had the potential to affect the 101 residents receiving an oral diet.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, observations, and review of facility menus, the facility failed to ensure that the menu was followed to ensure appropriate nutrition for the residents. This deficient practice had the potential to affect the 101 residents receiving an oral diet in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure proper labeling of food items, storage of food items, and discarding of expired food items; failed to ensure hair nets were available for use by dietary staff; and failed to ensure one floor ice milk chest freezer, one low temperature dishwasher, and one grease trap were operating properly. This had the potential to affect 101 residents who received an oral diet.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and review of the facility policy, the facility failed to maintain one of two facility dumpsters in a sanitary condition by ensuring the dumpster had fitted lids.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and review of facility checklists and training information, the facility failed to maintain a clean, comfortable, and homelike environment in resident rooms/bathrooms and a shower room on one (100 Hall) of two halls. Specifically, four resident rooms and/or bathrooms were observed to have broken tiles, exposed concrete, and/or holes in the walls, and the 100 Hall shower room was observed to have a rust-colored substance on the walls, floors, and soap holders.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure personal protective equipment (PPE) was worn appropriately in one out of four units (the COVID-19 Isolation Unit) and housekeeping staff maintained a sanitary environment.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure the level one Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) accurately reflected diagnosed mental illnesses for two of three sampled residents (R) (R#25 and R#52) who were reviewed for PASRR.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure reasonable efforts were made to facilitate participation of the resident's responsible party (RP) in care plan meetings for one of 3 sampled residents (R) (R#1) reviewed for care planning participation.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a safe discharge for one of three residents (R) (R#260) reviewed for discharge. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure the physician was notified and education of the resident/responsible party on the potential risks was documented when R#260 left the facility against medical advice (AMA).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide activities of daily living (ADL) care for one of three sampled residents (R) (R#97) reviewed for ADL care. Specifically, the facility failed to provide nail care for a dependent resident.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure oxygen was administered at the physician-order flow rate, oxygen saturation was regularly checked and documented to determine if as-needed (PRN) oxygen should be administered, and nurses accurately documented oxygen administration on the Medication Administration Record (MAR) for one of one sampled resident (R) (R#84) reviewed for oxygen use.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure communication was documented between the facility staff and dialysis staff to ensure pertinent information was being communicated for one of one residents (R) (R#60) reviewed for dialysis.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to fully assess for the use of side rails/bed rails for one of three residents (R) (R#258) reviewed for accidents. Specifically, the facility failed to: - Ensure an initial safety assessment as well as on-going safety assessments were completed for the use of quarter side rails/bed rails, - Ensure a physician's order was in place for the use of quarter side rails/bed rails, - Ensure a consent was in place for the use of quarter side rails/bed rails, and - Ensure that the care plan identified the use of quarter side rails/bed rails.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure the medication error rate was below 5%. During observations of medication administration, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) AAA made four medication errors out of 29 total opportunities, which resulted in a 13.79% medication error rate for two of three residents (R) (R#102 and R#45) observed.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interviews, and review of the hospice contract, the facility failed to integrate a plan of care between hospice and the facility staff in order to determine which disciplinary would provide direct care services for one of one resident (R) (R#31) reviewed for receiving hospice services.
9 fire safety citations on file: 4 on September 11, 2025, 4 on May 30, 2024, 1 on July 21, 2022.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| April 15, 2025 | Fine | $8,948 |
| April 15, 2025 | Payment Denial | 23 days from June 14, 2025 |
A payment denial means Medicare and Medicaid stopped paying for new admissions for that period.
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 | Georgia | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 3.35 | 3.56 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.24 | 0.50 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.14 | 3.10 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.95 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.16 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 61.5% | 46.0% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 75.0% | 44.5% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 3.66 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 3.43 on weekdays and 3.14 on weekends, 8% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 0.0% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.23 in April to June 2025 to 3.35 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 | 3.35 | 0.24 | 3.43 | 3.14 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 97 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.37 | 0.21 | 3.48 | 3.10 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 103 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.54 | 0.33 | 3.67 | 3.23 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 97 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.23 | 0.28 | 3.36 | 2.90 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 107 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Georgia, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.50 | 0.46 | 3.68 | 3.03 | 3.3% | 0.6% 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. If you work here, your report helps start one.
| Job | Median | Middle half | Employed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Georgia, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $18.12 | $17.06 to $20.66 | 43,440 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $29.82 | $25.43 to $33.99 | 21,060 |
| Registered nurses | $44.98 | $38.02 to $51.12 | 100,950 |
| 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 | Georgia | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 16.1 | 15.3 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.5 | 0.9 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.1 | 2.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.9 | 3.2 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.8 | 2.6 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 18.0 | 15.2 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.3 | 5.6 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 13.6 | 19.9 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 15.2 | 25.0 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 26.2 | 11.6 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.9 | 2.1 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 3.1 | 1.9 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Haralson Nsg & Rehab Center's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (49.3% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
49.3% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · Georgia: 49 better, 27 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. 53 eligible stays.
10.1% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Georgia: 2 better, 17 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. 59 eligible stays.
7.4% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 7.1% · Georgia: 0 better, 8 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. 46 eligible stays.
32.6% this home
Median of homes: Georgia46.9% · 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. 49 residents counted.
2.8% this home
Median of homes: Georgia0.4% · 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. 72 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Georgia2.2% · 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. 72 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: Georgia97.4% · 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. 15 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: HARALSON CYPRESS LLC. CMS links this home to Cypress Skilled Nursing, a group of 5 nursing homes averaging 2.2 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ovits, Isaac | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 01/01/2014 | |
| Patterson, Dianne | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 05/07/2018 | |
| Cypress Skilled Nursing LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 01/01/2014 | |
| Bender, Sara | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 07/02/2025 | |
| Caldwell, Leighana | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 06/18/2024 | |
| Cotton, Kesha | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/02/2023 | |
| Langley, Kevin | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 11/29/2021 | |
| Macatula, Maria | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 07/31/2017 | |
| McKey, Jenna | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/14/2022 | |
| Moore, Xavier | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 08/26/2023 | |
| Mote, Kayla | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 09/15/2022 | |
| Nordholm, Katherine | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/01/2014 | |
| Ovits, Isaac | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/01/2014 | |
| Patterson, Dianne | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 05/07/2018 | |
| Richardson, Bryianna | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 03/28/2022 | |
| Cypress Skilled Nursing LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 11/20/2025 | |
| Bender, Sara | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 07/02/2025 | |
| Caldwell, Leighana | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 06/18/2024 | |
| Cotton, Kesha | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/02/2023 | |
| Langley, Kevin | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 11/29/2021 | |
| Macatula, Maria | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 07/31/2017 | |
| McKey, Jenna | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/14/2022 | |
| Moore, Xavier | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 08/26/2023 | |
| Mote, Kayla | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 09/15/2022 | |
| Nordholm, Katherine | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/01/2014 | |
| Ovits, Isaac | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/01/2014 | |
| Patterson, Dianne | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/07/2018 | |
| Richardson, Bryianna | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 03/28/2022 |
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 Georgia. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.