Home / West Virginia / Logan
Po Box 540, Logan, WV 25601 · Logan County · (304) 752-2273
66 certified beds, about 65 residents a day · For profit - Partnership · Medicare and Medicaid since 2001
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 515175 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on August 9, 2023, inspectors cited 10 health deficiencies (the West Virginia average is 11.7, the national average 9.2).
Of 31 health citations since September 2019, 3 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (2 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 1 fine totaling $16,981 in the last three years; the largest was $16,981, and the latest is dated June 11, 2025.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.31 hours per resident per day, against 3.67 across West Virginia and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.68 of those hours.
36.8% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (West Virginia average 44.1%).
CMS links it to Genesis Healthcare, an affiliated group of 184 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 31 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide food in the correct consistency per physician orders and resident's individual needs for Resident # 168 resulting in a choking incident requiring emergency response and hospitalization. This created an immediate jeopardy situation. This failed practice had the potential to affect more than a limited number of residents. The facility had corrected this situation that began on 12/04/24 on 12/09/24. This issue is cited at past noncompliance. Resident identifiers: #168, #33, #51, #22, #25, #47, #39, #35, and #59. Facility Census: 63.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure safe operating essential equipment for the facility's ice machine and Resident 21's bed. Resident identifier: #21. Facility census: 63.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to report alleged physical abuse to the proper state agencies within the required two (2) hour timeframe. This is true for one (1) of seven (7) residents reviewed under the care area of abuse. Resident identifier: #32. Facility Census: 63.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to develop a care plan in the area of fall prevention for Resident #42. Resident identifier: #42 Facility census: 63.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to be free from accidents/hazards by leaving Resident #21 in a broken bed. Resident identifier #21. Facility census 63.
Inspectors wroteBased on resident interview, record review and staff interview the facility failed to ensure a resident received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice and the resident's choices, related to pain management. Resident #12 complained his medication was administered late frequently which caused him to suffer unnecessarily. This demonstrates actual physical harm for Resident #12. This was true for one (1) of three (3) reviewed for the care area of Pain. Resident identifier: Resident #12. Facility Census: 65.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and staff interview, 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 Resident handwashing and to maintain a separation between the clean and soiled area of the laundry room to prevent contamination by airflow. This practice had the potential to affect more than an isolated number of residents. Facility census: 64.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and staff interview, the facility failed to implement an ongoing activity program designed to meet the interests of and support the well-being of each resident specifically premeal activities not being provided. This was a random opportunity for discovery. Facility census: 64.
Inspectors wroteBased on Quality Assurance Performance Improvement (QAPI) attendance sheets and staff interview, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure the required QAPI meetings were held, and all required QAPI committee members were in attendance. This deficient practice had the potential to affect more than an isolated number of residents in the facility. Facility census: 64.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, and staff interview the facility failed to treat each resident with respect and dignity regarding meal service. This was a random opportunity for discovery. Facility census: 64.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to notify the Ombudsman of a resident's transfer to the hospital. This deficient practice had the potential to affect one (1) of two (2) residents reviewed for the care area of hospitalization. Resident identifier: #33. Facility census: 64.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to have a complete and accurate Minimum Data Set (MDS) in the care area of restraints and antipsychotic medication. Resident identifier: Resident # 24, and #50. Facility census 64.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident's comprehensive care plan was revised when there was a change in the resident's plan of care. This deficient practice had the potential to affect one (1) of one (1) residents reviewed for the care area of transmission-based precautions. Resident identifier: #33. Facility census: 64.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, staff interview and resident interview, the facility failed to provide dialysis services consistent with professional standards of care. This was true for one (1) of one (1) resident reviewed under the care area of dialysis. Resident identifier: #35. Facility census: 64.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice. The facility failed to obtain laboratory testing in accordance with physician's orders for one (1) of five (5) residents reviewed for the care area of unnecessary medications. Resident identifier: #50. Facility census: 64.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) Adult Immunization Schedule, record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure all eligible residents were offered and/or given the Pneumonia vaccine. This was true for one (1) of five (5) residents reviewed for immunizations. Resident identifier: #15. Facility census: 64.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure resident's Physician's Order for Scope of Treatment (POST) forms conveying end-of-life wishes were complete. This deficient practice was found for two (2) of 20 POST forms reviewed for the area of advanced directives during the Long-Term Care Survey Process. The POST forms for Resident #13 and #1 did not specify how long intravenous fluids were to be administered. Resident identifier: #13 and #1. Facility census:
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and staff interview, the facility failed to revise the comprehensive care plan when a change occurred. This deficient practice was true for one (1) of 20 residents reviewed during the long-term care survey process. Resident identifier: #23. Facility census: 66.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice. The physician's orders for Resident #40 were not followed for monitoring blood glucose levels . This failed practice had the potential to affect one (1) of five (5) residents reviewed for the care area of unnecessary medications during the Long Term Care Survey Process. Resident identifier: #40 Facility census:
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to complete quarterly smoking evaluations for one (1) of one (1) residents reviewed for the care area of smoking. Resident identifier: #30. Facility census: 66.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observations and staff interview the facility failed to prevent complications for a resident who receives enteral feeding. It was discovered the head of the bed had not been elevated to the correct position. This was true for one (1) of two (2) residents reviewed for the care area of tube feeding during the Long Term Care Survey Process. Resident identifier: #13 Facility census:
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to deliver respiratory care services consistent with professional standards of practice. This was true for one (1) of two (2) residents reviewed in the care area of respiratory care during the long term care survey process. Resident identifier: #216. Facility census:
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure documentation of the pharmacist's recommendations and the response 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: #30. Facility census: 66.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and staff interview, the facility failed to provide appropriate assistive devices to Resident #10 to maintain their current ability to drink independently This was a random opportunity for discovery. Resident Identifier: #10. Facility Census: 66. a) Resident #10 On 04/04/22 at 12:00PM , the resident was observed during lunch. The dietary ticket for Resident #10 indicated they were to have cup with handles .lid. The resident did not have a cup with handles and lid. The only cup on the lunch tray was a plastic coffee cup. On 04/04/22 at 12:05 PM, Nurse Aide (NA) #37 confirmed the cup with handles and lid was not on the lunch tray. NA #37 stated, she (Resident #10) can put her thumb around the coffee cup handle and hold it. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interview, Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Facility Policy, and observation,` the facility has failed to ensure and 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. The facility failed to store clean linens in a safe, clean and sanitary manner. Furthermore, the facility failed to appropriately place Residents #59 and #28, diagnosed with Multiple Drug Resistant Organisms (MDRO), in contact precautions, and they also failed to use proper Personal Protection Equipment (PPE) while providing care. In addition, the facility failed to have PPE equipment readily available for staff. [...]
Inspectors wrotec) Resident # 28 A review of Resident #28's medical record found the resident was discharged to the hospital on [DATE]. The record did not have any evidence to show they notified the Ombudsman of this discharge. On 09/25/19 at 4:02 PM, an interview with the Social Worker revealed she did not send a copy of the discharge notice to the Ombudsman. She stated, she did not know that she had to notify the Ombudsman when the resident was going to the hospital. Based on record review and staff interview, facility failed to notify the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman of resident discharges as required. This was true for three (3) of four (4) resident discharges. Resident identifiers: #64, #56 and #28. Facility census: 64.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to accurately complete the minimum data set (MDS) assessment when they entered inaccurate weight measurements into the nutritional section of the assessment. This deficient practice was found for one (1) of 20 sampled residents reviewed during the survey. Resident identifier: #50. Facility census: 64.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interview, and resident interview the facility failed to ensure the comprehensive care plan was appropriately reviewed and revised on a quarterly basis. This was true for one (1) of two (2) Residents reviewed in the care area of interdisciplinary care plan meetings. Resident identifier: #45. Facility census: 64.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and staff interview, the facility failed to maintain safe water temperatures. This failed practice had the potential to affect more than an isolated number of residents. Facility census: 64. a) Water Temperatures During observations of rooms [ROOM NUMBERS], on 09/23/19 at 11:30 a.m., the water felt too hot to the touch and was too hot to comfortably hold your hand under for a prolonged period of time. At 11:38 p.m. on 09/23/19, the Maintenance Director (MD) came to the 300 hall and obtained the water temperature in the hand sinks in rooms [ROOM NUMBERS]. The water temperature was 118. 6 degrees Fahrenheit (F) in room [ROOM NUMBER], and was 126 degrees F in room [ROOM NUMBER]. The maintenance director when asked when the last time he obtained a water temperature he stated, I checked them this morning and they were 126 I believe so I made some adjustments. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, and review of the 2017 Food Code, the facility failed to ensure ready-to-eat food served to a resident was free from contamination when an employee touched a resident's sandwich with bare hands. This deficient practice was found during a random opportunity for discovery and affected an isolated number of residents. Facility census: 64.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to maintain medical records that were accurately documented. This was true for two (2) of two (2) Residents reviewed for documentation of personal hygiene care. Resident identifiers: #45, #39. Facility census:
13 fire safety citations on file: 6 on August 9, 2023, 2 on April 6, 2022, 5 on September 26, 2019.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| June 11, 2025 | Fine | $16,981 |
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 | West Virginia | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 3.31 | 3.67 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.68 | 0.73 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.97 | 3.17 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.77 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.85 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 36.8% | 44.1% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 30.0% | 42.3% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 4.50 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 3.44 on weekdays and 2.97 on weekends, 14% 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 3.18 in April to June 2025 to 3.31 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 | 3.31 | 0.68 | 3.44 | 2.97 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 65 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.40 | 0.57 | 3.56 | 3.01 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 65 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.21 | 0.58 | 3.36 | 2.82 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 65 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.18 | 0.60 | 3.33 | 2.80 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 64 |
| 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 | 5.6 | 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 | 0.4 | 1.6 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.2 | 4.4 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.4 | 1.1 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.2 | 15.9 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 7.0 | 4.2 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 18.2 | 13.4 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 31.0 | 22.4 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 8.9 | 11.3 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.8 | 1.8 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.0 | 1.8 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Logan 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% · 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. 42 eligible stays.
10.2% 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. 48 eligible stays.
5.8% 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. 42 eligible stays.
52.5% this home
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. 40 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. 72 residents counted.
0.0% 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. 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: 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. 17 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: THREE MILE CURVE OPERATIONS LLC. CMS links this home to Genesis Healthcare, a group of 184 nursing homes averaging 2.3 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Genesis Operations V LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 12/31/2011 |
| Fc-Gen Operations Investment LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 02/02/2015 | |
| Gen Operations I LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 02/02/2015 | |
| Gen Operations II LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 02/02/2015 | |
| Genesis Healthcare Inc | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 02/02/2015 | |
| Genesis Healthcare LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 02/02/2015 | |
| Genesis Holdings LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 02/02/2015 | |
| Ghc Holdings LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 02/02/2015 | |
| Sun Healthcare Group Inc | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 02/02/2015 | |
| Whitman, Arnold | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Individual | 02/02/2015 | |
| Berg, Michael | Corporate officer | Individual | 12/01/2012 | |
| Bridgeford, Laura | Corporate officer | Individual | 06/01/2024 | |
| Mendelson, Avi | Corporate officer | Individual | 06/01/2024 | |
| Frazier, Dorothy | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/15/2024 | |
| Toothman, James | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 02/25/2023 | |
| Frazier, Dorothy | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 02/25/2025 | |
| Toothman, James | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 02/25/2025 |
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.