8575 Rixlew Lane, Manassas, VA 20109 · Manassas City County · (703) 257-9770
120 certified beds, about 116 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1979
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 495038 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on January 22, 2026, inspectors cited 9 health deficiencies (the Virginia average is 14.3, the national average 9.2).
Of 27 health citations since March 2021, 2 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents.
CMS lists 2 fines totaling $16,376 in the last three years; the largest was $8,188, and the latest is dated February 13, 2024.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.48 hours per resident per day, against 3.76 across Virginia and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.54 of those hours.
35.2% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Virginia average 48.1%).
CMS links it to Commonwealth Care of Roanoke, an affiliated group of 12 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 27 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, staff interview, and facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to dispose of refuse properly. The facility staff failed to maintain a clean dumpster area during the facility task- kitchen observation 1/20/26 at 11:50 AM.
Inspectors wroteBased on resident interview, staff interview, clinical record review and facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to implement the comprehensive care plan for two of 43 residents in the survey sample, Resident #6 and Resident #35.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, facility document review, and clinical review, the facility staff failed to provide activities to promote the highest level of wellbeing for three of 43 residents in the survey sample, Residents #24, #17, and #72.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, staff interview, and facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to maintain the kitchen in a sanitary manner.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, facility document review, and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to ensure dignity for one of 43 residents in the survey sample, Resident #133.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, staff interview and facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to ensure all discharge needs were met prior to discharge from the facility for one of 43 residents in the survey sample, Resident #136.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, facility document review, and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to provide ADL (activities of daily living) care for one of 43 residents in the survey sample, Resident #133.
Inspectors wroteBased on resident interview, staff interview, clinical record review and facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to implement interventions to prevent a decrease in mobility for one of 43 residents in the survey sample, Resident #35.
Inspectors wroteBased on resident interview, staff interview, clinical record review and facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to implement a complete pain management program for one of 43 residents in the survey sample, Resident #6.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interviews, family interview, clinical record review, and facility document reviews, it has been determined that the facility staff failed to ensure that a resident was free from neglect when they neglected to properly assess, monitor, treat, and consult a physician or practitioner for 1 of 15 residents (Resident #15, closed record review) in the survey sample who was unresponsive and presented with respiratory distress, which constituted harm.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interviews, Emergency Medical Service (EMS) report, facility document review, and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to assess, monitor, and appropriately treat an unresponsive resident who presented with respiratory distress for 1 of 15 residents (Resident #15, closed record review) in the survey sample, which constituted harm.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interviews and clinical record review the facility staff failed to honor a Family Member/Responsible Party's verbalized choice for a transfer from the facility to the hospital or to another facility for 1 of 3 resident's (Resident #13) reviewed for participation in treatment options which resulted in the responsible party physically removing the resident from the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview, facility document review, and clinical record, it was determined that the facility staff failed to notify the on-call practitioner of a resident's change in condition including shortness of breath, difficulty breathing, and unresponsiveness for approximately 2 hours, and the decision to transfer from the facility to the emergency room for 1 of 15 residents in the survey sample, Resident #15 (a closed record resident).
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interviews, clinical record review, and review of facility documents, the facility staff failed to provide two-person assistance while transferring Resident #13, which resulted in a fall for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for falls in the survey sample.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview, Emergency Medical Service (EMS) report, facility document review, and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to ensure the licensed nurses and other nursing personnel have the knowledge, competencies, and skill sets to provide care and respond to emergencies for a resident who was unresponsive with breathing difficulties for 1 of 15 residents (Resident #15, a closed record review) in the survey sample.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, resident interview, staff interview, clinical record review and facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to implement the comprehensive care plan for five of 46 residents in the survey sample, Residents #45, #24, # 64, #56 and # 103.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to provide care and service for a complete dialysis [1] program for three of 46 residents in the survey sample, Residents # 24, # 64 and # 56.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, resident interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined the facility staff failed to place a call bell within reach for one of 46 residents in the survey sample, Resident #103.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, clinical record review, and facility document review, it was determined that facility staff failed to provide respiratory services according to the physician's orders for one of 46 residents in the survey sample, Resident # 45.
Inspectors wroteBased on resident interview, clinical record review, facility document review and staff interviews it was determined that the facility failed to maintain a complete and accurate clinical record for one of 46 residents in the survey sample, Resident #42.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to dispose of laboratory vaccutainers upon expiration date in three of three medication storage rooms, (Evergreen, Magnolia and Dogwood medication storage rooms). Expired laboratory vaccutainer tubes were observed available for use in Evergreen, Magnolia and Dogwood medication storage rooms. The Evergreen medication storage room contained 17 expired laboratory (lab) vaccutainer tubes, Magnolia medication storage room contained 18 expired lab vaccutainer tubes and Dogwood medication storage room contained seven expired lab vaccutainer tubes.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, and facility document review it was determined facility staff failed to store food in the kitchen and in one of three nourishment rooms in accordance with professional standards for food service safety.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, facility document review, and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to notify the physician of a change in peritoneal dialysis status for one of 46 residents in the survey sample, Resident #245. The facility staff failed to notify the physician when Resident #245 did not complete peritoneal dialysis on 2/28/21 and 3/1/21.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interviews, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined the facility staff failed to develop and / or implement the comprehensive care plan for two of forty six residents, Resident #53 and Resident #61. The facility staff failed to develop and implement a comprehensive care plan to address the use of an incentive spirometer for Residents #53 and # 61.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to review and revise the comprehensive care plan for three of 46 residents in the survey sample, Residents #90, #65 and #194. The facility staff failed to review and revise the comprehensive care plans for Resident #90, Resident #65 and Resident #194 to address the residents' use of bed rails.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, resident interview, staff interview, clinical record review, and facility document review, it was determined that facility staff failed to provide respiratory care, consistent with professional standards of practice, for three of 46 residents in the survey sample, Residents # 61, # 64 and #53. The facility staff failed to store Resident #61 and # 53's incentive spirometers and Resident #64's C-PAP [continuous positive airway pressure] mask in a sanitary manner.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to implement bed rail requirements for three of 46 residents in the survey sample, Residents #90, #65 and #194. 1. The facility staff failed to assess Resident #90 as requiring the use of bed rails and failed to obtain consent for the use of bed rails. On 3/2/21, the resident was observed lying in bed with bed rails in the upright position. 2. The facility staff failed to assess Resident #65 as requiring the use of bed rails. On 3/2/21 and 3/3/21 Resident #65 was observed lying in bed with bed rails in the upright position. 3. The facility staff failed to assess Resident #194 for the use of bed rails and failed to obtain consent for the use of bed rails. On 3/2/21 Resident #194 was observed lying in bed with bed rails in the upright position.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| February 13, 2024 | Fine | $8,188 |
| February 13, 2024 | Fine | $8,188 |
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 | Virginia | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 3.48 | 3.76 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.54 | 0.69 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.08 | 3.29 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.81 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.14 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 35.2% | 48.1% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 33.3% | 48.2% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 3.54 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 3.65 on weekdays and 3.08 on weekends, 16% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 0.6% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.46 in April to June 2025 to 3.48 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 | 3.48 | 0.54 | 3.65 | 3.08 | 0.6% | 0 of 90 | 116 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.58 | 0.50 | 3.73 | 3.18 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 114 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.44 | 0.50 | 3.62 | 2.99 | 0.4% | 0 of 92 | 116 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.46 | 0.52 | 3.65 | 2.99 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 112 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Virginia, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.58 | 0.56 | 3.76 | 3.12 | 5.7% | 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. If you work here, your report helps start one.
| Job | Median | Middle half | Employed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Virginia, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $20.77 | $17.80 to $22.56 | 40,580 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $31.21 | $28.66 to $35.84 | 15,550 |
| Registered nurses | $45.00 | $38.51 to $49.53 | 77,490 |
| 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 | Virginia | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 19.7 | 14.8 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.2 | 0.4 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.8 | 1.6 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.2 | 3.6 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.8 | 1.3 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 12.8 | 15.6 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.5 | 4.7 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 23.4 | 14.2 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 27.0 | 22.3 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 6.9 | 11.5 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 0.9 | 1.5 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Manassas Health and Rehab Center's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it better than the national rate (59.5% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
59.5% this home
Better than the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · Virginia: 101 better, 22 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. 271 eligible stays.
11.6% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Virginia: 1 better, 9 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. 272 eligible stays.
6.5% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 7.1% · Virginia: 2 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. 175 eligible stays.
32.9% this home
Median of homes: Virginia60.0% · 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. 79 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Virginia0.7% · 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. 112 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Virginia2.1% · 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. 108 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: Virginia97.8% · 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. 8 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: MANASSAS HEALTH CARE LLC. CMS links this home to Commonwealth Care of Roanoke, a group of 12 nursing homes averaging 3.6 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whittington, Katelyn | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 11/05/2017 | |
| Alesantrino, Joe | Corporate officer | Individual | 06/01/2019 | |
| Petrine, Deborah | Corporate officer | Individual | 10/08/2006 | |
| Commonwealth Care of Roanoke Inc | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 10/05/2005 |
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 Virginia. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.