Home / North Carolina / Elizabeth City
901 Halstead Boulevard, Elizabeth City, NC 27909 · Pasquotank County · (252) 338-0137
108 certified beds, about 101 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1978
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 345184 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on May 21, 2025, inspectors cited 12 health deficiencies (the North Carolina average is 4.7, the national average 9.2).
Of 33 health citations since March 2023, 1 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents.
CMS lists 1 fine totaling $10,868 in the last three years; the largest was $10,868, and the latest is dated May 21, 2025.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 2.75 hours per resident per day, against 3.85 across North Carolina and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.36 of those hours.
64.7% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (North Carolina average 49.0%).
CMS links it to Yad Healthcare, an affiliated group of 13 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 33 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, and staff, family and Medical Director interviews, the facility failed to protect a severely cognitively resident from physical restraint from a private duty Caregiver and chemical restraint. When Resident #199 refused to take medications from the Nurse the private duty Caregiver offered to assist and forced medications into the Resident's mouth, held her hand over the Resident's mouth, to force her to swallow. When Resident #199 became combative, and kicking and spitting out medications the private Caregiver restrained the Resident by placing her leg over Resident #199 legs to prevent her from kicking. The Nurse asked the Caregiver to stop and left the room to call the on-call provider. The Caregiver continued to restrain the Resident until the Nurse returned to the room and administered an intramuscular antipsychotic medication (chemical restraint) to calm her. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview and review of the Facility Assessment the facility failed to identify any cultural considerations for the resident population, failed to ensure the staffing plan considered specific staffing needs for each unit and shift as required, and failed to evaluate contracted services utilized by the facility to provide necessary care for its residents during normal operations and emergencies which had the potential to affect 88 of 88 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide written information to residents and resident representatives regarding advance directive and/or an opportunity to formulate an advance directive for 19 of 22 residents reviewed for advance directives (Resident #1, #5, #8, #21, #25, #26, #29, #33, #37, #40, #50, #52, #58, #72, #73, #75, #91, #95, and #302).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, and record review the facility failed to clean and maintain resident rooms for 6 of 29 resident rooms on 1 of 4 halls (300 Hall) observed for environment (Resident #39's room, Resident #29's room, Resident #8's room, Resident #56's room, Resident #92's room, and Resident #25's room).
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews, and staff and resident interviews, the facility failed to hold a care plan meeting or invite the resident to participate in the care planning process for 2 of 26 residents whose care plans were reviewed (Resident #26 and Resident #37).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to accurately code the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment in the area of smoking and elopement alarms for 1 of 26 residents whose MDS assessments were reviewed (Resident #33).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to update the care plan to include hearing aids for 1 of 33 residents whose care plans were reviewed (Resident #29).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, resident, staff, and physician interviews, the facility failed to obtain a physician order for the use and care of an indwelling urinary catheter for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for urinary catheter (Resident #1).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, and staff, resident, Pharmacist and Medical Director interviews, the facility failed to have effective systems in place to ensure intravenous (a soft, flexible tube placed inside a vein used to give medicine or fluids) antibiotic medication was available as ordered for a newly admitted resident for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for IV antibiotic therapy (Resident #95).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff and resident interviews, and Physician interviews, the facility failed to administer scheduled intravenous (a soft, flexible tube placed inside a vein used to give medicine or fluids) antibiotic medication which resulted in 4 doses of the antibiotic being missed for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for IV antibiotic therapy (Resident #95).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, and staff and Resident Representative interviews, the facility failed to notify the resident, Resident Representative and Ombudsman in writing of the reason for transfer/discharge to the hospital and failed to fully complete the bed hold policy document when a resident transferred to the hospital. The deficient practice affected 3 of 3 residents reviewed for hospitalization (Resident #72, Resident #21, Resident #52). The following included: 1. Resident #72 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A review of Resident #72's most recent quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had severe cognitive impairment. A review of Resident #72's nursing progress notes revealed she was discharged to the hospital on 4/30/25 and returned on 5/15/25. a. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interviews, resident and Responsible Party (RP) interviews, the facility failed to provide the resident or the RP a written summary of the baseline care plan and medication list for 2 of 4 residents reviewed for care planning (Resident #75 and Resident #91).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, resident interviews and staff interviews, the facility failed to conduct and document a care plan meeting with a cognitively intact (Resident #86) and moderately impaired (Resident #38) residents newly admitted to the facility and failed to conduct and invite a cognitively intact resident to participate in care plan meetings after two annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments and three quarterly MDS assessments (Resident #26) for 3 of 6 residents reviewed for care planning.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, and staff interviews the facility failed to maintain 2 of 4 skillets and 9 of 15 baking sheets free from grease build up and failed to maintain one ice scoop holder free of standing water and mold. These practices had the potential to affect ice and food served to residents. The facility census was 91 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to develop and implement an individualized person-centered baseline care plan that included the use of insulin (a medication used to lower the blood glucose [sugar] in the blood) and anticoagulants (a medication use to prevent clotting of the blood) for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications (Resident #293).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interviews the facility failed to implement an individualized person-centered care plan for a resident with impaired vision for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for nutrition (Resident #36).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observations and staff interviews, the facility failed to obtain a physician order on a resident's medical record for the use of supplemental oxygen and apply signage indicating the use of oxygen outside the resident's room for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for oxygen use (Resident #292).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide all food in bowls as ordered by the physician for 1 of 1 residents requiring adaptive equipment for meals (Resident #36).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff, and the facility ' s Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) Committee, the facility failed to maintain implemented procedures and monitor interventions the committee put into place following the 7/14/20 complaint investigation survey, 9/20/20 complaint survey, 5/10/21 complaint survey, and the 3/30/22 recertification and complaint investigation and survey. This was for 5 deficiencies cited on the current recertification and complaint investigation survey of 3/2/23. A deficiency was cited on 3/30/22 in the area of safe/clean/ homelike environment (F584). A deficiency was cited on 9/20/20, 5/10/21, and 3/30/22 in the area of accuracy of assessments (F641). A deficiency was cited on 5/10/21 and 3/30/22 in the area of develop/implement comprehensive care plan (F656). [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and staff interviews, the facility failed to assess residents for eligibility and ensure residents were offered the pneumococcal vaccinations upon admittance into the facility (Resident #47) and offer annual influenza vaccine (Resident #40) for 2 of 5 residents reviewed for immunizations.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, resident and staff interview the facility failed to develop an individualized person-centered care plan for 3 of 32 residents whose care plans were reviewed. (Resident #48, Resident #36, Resident #14)
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review, resident and staff interview the facility failed to provide hair washing for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #43) reviewed for Activity of Daily Living (ADL) care who required assistance with bathing.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review, and staff, Nurse Practitioner, and Medical Director interviews the facility failed to follow physician orders for turning and repositioning and failed to monitor specialty air mattress settings to ensure set to correct weight for 1 of 6 residents reviewed for pressure ulcers (Resident #42).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to place hand/wrist splint to the left hand for contracture management for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for limited range of motion (Resident #2).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review, staff interviews, and physician interviews, the facility failed to maintain an indwelling urinary catheter drainage bag below the bladder to allow for proper drainage and reduce risk for urinary tract infection (Resident #42) and failed to obtain a physician order for indwelling urinary catheter for 2 of 2 residents (Resident #42 and Resident #170) reviewed for urinary catheter.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and staff interview the facility failed to follow physician ' s order to administer as needed pain medication to control a resident ' s pain for 1 of 1 residents reviewed for pain management. (Resident #48)
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and staff interview the facility failed to document an assessment of the resident ' s status, shunt cite, and vital signs upon returning to the facility after dialysis for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for dialysis. (Resident #18).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interviews, Physician interview, and Pharmacy Consultant interview, the facility failed to ensure Physician orders for as needed (PRN) psychotropic medications were time limited in duration for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications (Resident #5).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide adaptive eating utensils and equipment as ordered by the physician for 1 of 3 residents requiring adaptive equipment for meals (Resident #2).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, and staff interviews the facility failed to maintain 1of 1 nourishment refrigerator in a clean and sanitary manner to prevent cross contamination by failing to clean up liquid spills.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and staff interviews the facility failed to provide a clean and sanitary environment by failing to clean a tube feeding pump and pole for 1 of 1 resident observed with a tube feeding pump and pole. (Resident #34) The facility also failed to provide a safe and sanitary environment when food and other debris was found lodged in 1 of 1 resident ' s HVAC (system used to heal and cool an area) unit. (Resident #15)
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to code the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment accurately for 2 of 2 residents in the areas of pressure ulcer (Resident # 59) and mechanically altered diet (Resident #14).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and staff interview the facility failed to complete a baseline care plan within 48 hours of admission to address the immediate needs for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for new admission. (Resident #18, Resident #170)
9 fire safety citations on file: 4 on May 22, 2024, 5 on March 2, 2023.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| May 21, 2025 | Fine | $10,868 |
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 | North Carolina | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 2.75 | 3.85 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.36 | 0.62 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.35 | 3.42 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.78 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.61 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 64.7% | 49.0% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 44.4% | 45.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 2 |
CMS expects 3.70 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 2.91 on weekdays and 2.35 on weekends, 19% 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 2.97 in April to June 2025 to 2.75 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 | 2.75 | 0.36 | 2.91 | 2.35 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 101 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 2.82 | 0.38 | 2.97 | 2.43 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 98 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 2.77 | 0.33 | 2.90 | 2.43 | 0.2% | 0 of 92 | 96 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 2.97 | 0.42 | 3.14 | 2.55 | 12.9% | 0 of 91 | 89 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| North Carolina, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.65 | 0.53 | 3.82 | 3.25 | 8.0% | 0.7% 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| North Carolina, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $18.49 | $17.28 to $21.08 | 64,010 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $30.42 | $28.50 to $33.51 | 18,010 |
| Registered nurses | $40.56 | $37.87 to $49.06 | 111,120 |
| 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 | North Carolina | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 15.9 | 15.6 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.5 | 0.7 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.6 | 2.3 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 3.5 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.4 | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 32.6 | 18.3 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.9 | 5.5 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 10.1 | 14.0 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 24.5 | 22.9 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 13.1 | 12.9 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.6 | 1.8 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.2 | 1.8 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Laurel Park Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (44.1% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
44.1% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · North Carolina: 93 better, 25 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. 142 eligible stays.
11.9% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · North Carolina: 1 better, 4 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. 147 eligible stays.
9.2% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 7.1% · North Carolina: 1 better, 3 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. 96 eligible stays.
72.7% this home
Median of homes: North Carolina54.0% · 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. 77 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: North Carolina0.6% · 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. 125 residents counted.
3.9% this home
Median of homes: North Carolina2.5% · 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. 125 residents counted.
97.2% this home
Median of homes: North Carolina97.5% · 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. 36 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: LAUREL PARK OPCO LLC. CMS links this home to Yad Healthcare, a group of 13 nursing homes averaging 1.7 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Laurel Park Opco Holdings LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 03/20/2023 | |
| Alter, Tzvi | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 03/20/2023 | |
| Alter, Tzvi | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Individual | 03/20/2023 | |
| Kintyhtt, Jennifer | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 03/20/2023 | |
| Alter, Tzvi | Corporate director | Individual | 03/20/2023 |
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 North Carolina. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.