Home / Georgia / Lawrenceville
88 Johnson Road, Building #2, Lawrenceville, GA 30046 · Gwinnett County · (404) 367-1907
100 certified beds, about 70 residents a day · For profit - Individual · Medicare and Medicaid since 2021
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 115772 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on November 21, 2025, inspectors cited 9 health deficiencies (the Georgia average is 5, the national average 9.2).
None of its 31 health citations since May 2022 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy.
CMS lists 1 fine totaling $4,017 in the last three years; the largest was $4,017, and the latest is dated July 18, 2024.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.63 hours per resident per day, against 3.56 across Georgia and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.55 of those hours.
42.1% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Georgia average 46.0%).
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 staff interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure deposited monetary funds were returned timely after discharge to the family of one resident (Resident (R) 88) out of a total of 23 residents reviewed in the sample. The facility's failure to ensure funds were returned to the resident's family in a timely manner after her discharge created the potential for the resident/resident's family to experience negative financial outcomes related to their inability to access the funds.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to protect residents from abuse by ensuring chemical restraints were not used unless medically necessary for two residents (Resident (R)16 and R47) out of a total of six residents reviewed for unnecessary medication. The facility's failure to ensure identified behaviors and potential side effects were consistently monitored for these residents created the potential for the residents to experience side effects related to the administration of unnecessary medication. A total of 23 residents were reviewed in the sample.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed protect residents from abuse by ensuring timely reporting of an allegation of financial abuse for one (Resident (R) 5) out of three residents reviewed for abuse. The facility's failure to ensure timely reporting of the allegation of abuse created the potential for this and other residents to experience ongoing effects related to abuse. A total of 23 residents were reviewed in the sample.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to protect residents from abuse by ensuring a thorough investigation into allegations of potential abuse was conducted for two out of three residents (Resident (R) 5 and R3) reviewed for abuse. The facility's failure to ensure thorough investigation of potential financial abuse for R5, and of an injury for R3, created the potential for these and other residents to experience ongoing effects related to abuse. A total of 23 residents were reviewed in the sample.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure one resident (Resident (R) 55) and their representative out of one resident reviewed for hospitalization out of a total sample of 23 residents received a written bed hold policy and transfer notice. This failure had the potential to result in the resident and/or their representative not having the knowledge of where and why a resident was transferred and/or how to appeal the transfer, if desired, and had the potential to cause confusion or distress regarding re-admission to the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observations, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a consistent program of activities was in place for one (Resident (R) 16) out of three residents reviewed for activities. The facility's failure to ensure activities were consistently provided per, and documented according to, R16's assessed preferences created the potential for the resident to experience negative psychosocial effects related to social isolation. A total of 23 residents were reviewed in the sample.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure physician orders for the use of an indwelling urinary catheter device were in place for one (Resident (R) 1) of two residents reviewed for urinary catheters. The facility's failure to ensure orders were in place for R1's suprapubic urinary catheter created the potential for the resident to go without appropriate catheter-related care and services. A total of 23 residents were reviewed in the sample.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, resident, resident family member, and staff interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure clinical criteria were met prior to prescribing and administering an antibiotic for a urinary tract infection (UTI) for one (Resident (R) 79) of one resident reviewed for antibiotic use out of a total sample of 23 residents. This failure had the potential to cause antibiotic resistance, increased risk of Clostridioides difficile infection, and adverse drug reactions.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observations, staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than five percent. Errors were made during the administration of medication for two of seven residents (Resident (R) 85 and R92) observed for medication administration. A total of two errors were made out of 25 opportunities for error, which resulted in an eight percent medication error rate. Medication errors have the potential to result in adverse health outcomes.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, staff interviews, and review of the facility's policy titled Food Safety Requirements, the facility failed to ensure food items were properly stored, labeled with expiration dates, and that expired foods were disposed of in a timely manner. The deficient practice had the potential to affect 47 of 49 residents who consumed an oral diet.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interviews and review of the facility's policies titled, Infection Prevention and Control Program and Water Management, the facility failed to develop an effective water management plan which included routine water management activities to prevent the growth and spread of Legionella and other opportunistic waterborne pathogens throughout the facility's water system. The facility's census was 49 residents. Review of the undated facility's policy titled, Infection Prevention and Control under Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines revealed the following: Number 17. Water Management, (b): Control measures and testing protocols are in place to address potential hazards associated with the facility's water system. Review of the undated facility's policy titled, Water Management Program under Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines revealed the following: Number 8. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interviews, and review of the facility's policy titled iQIES or Other System Downtime MDS, the facility failed to ensure that required Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments were transmitted within regulatory guidelines to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Quality Improvement Evaluation System (QIES) Assessment Submission and Processing (ASAP) System for 31 residents (R) (R89,R55, R56, R8, R62, R7, R33, R85, R3, R19, R86, R84, R16, R31, R91, R15, R25, R72, R75, R88, R81, R90, R77, R38, R45, R20, R92, R78, R50, R278, and R368) out of 44 sampled residents. Findings Include: Review of the undated facility's policy titled iQIES or Other System Downtime MDS, under the Policy section revealed, It is the policy of this facility to transmit MDS data timely so that the facility will not be negatively impacted by iQIES or other system downtimes. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews, staff interviews, and review of the facility's policy titled, Baseline Care Plan, the facility failed to develop a baseline care plan within 48 hours of admission that addressed two medications, (an opioid and a diuretic) for one out of five sampled residents (R ) (R33) selected for unnecessary medications review. This had the potential to cause adverse medical effects for R33 with no known interventions for staff.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff and resident interviews, and review of the facility's policy titled, Comprehensive Care Plans, the facility failed to develop a care plan that included a communication or language preference for one of three sampled residents (R) (R179) whose primary language was not English. This deficiency had the potential to adversely impact the quality of care and quality of life provided to the resident.
Inspectors wroteBased on resident family interview, Staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility policy titled, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation, the facility failed to protect the resident's (R) R1 right to be free from sexual abuse by (R5). Specifically, the facility failed to ensure a safe environment for (R1) from (R5) with known behaviors of exposing his penis, masturbating, and inappropriately touching female residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interviews, record review, and review of the facility policy titled, Compliance with Reporting Allegations of Abuse/Neglect/Exploitation, the facility failed to implement policies and procedures for ensuring the reporting of a reasonable suspicion of a crime in accordance with section 1150B of the Act of an allegation of sexual abuse was reported to the State Survey Agency (SSA) within the required time frame for two of eleven residents (R) (R5 and R8). Specifically, the facility failed to report R5 exhibited sexually aggressive behavior, saying sexual things, and exposing his penis to R8.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, review of facility documentation, and policy review titled Quality Assurance Performance Improvement, the facility failed to ensure policies and procedures were implemented to address the facility's Quality Assessment and Performance Improvement (QAPI) plan and program, in which data was gathered, analyzed, developed, implemented, and re-evaluated to address adverse events related to potential deficient practice. This had the potential to affect all 44 residents residing in the facility at the time of the survey.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interviews, and review of facility policy titled Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI), the facility failed to ensure that the Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) committee met at least quarterly. The census was 44.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interview, and review of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) policy, the facility failed to ensure that all residents and/or their representatives were informed by 5:00 p.m. the next calendar day following the occurrence of a single resident or staff confirmed COVID-19 positive infection, received cumulative updates, and informed of mitigating actions taken by the facility to prevent or reduce the risk of transmission. The census was 44.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interviews, and review of the facility policy titled, Baseline Care Plan, the facility failed to develop a baseline care plan for five of five residents (R) (R#242, R#1, R#40, R#193, and R#141), out of 20 sample residents
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation, interviews, review of the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI), and review of the facility policy titled, Comprehensive Care Plan the facility failed to develop and implement a person-centered comprehensive plan of care with measurable goals and timeframe's to meet resident needs for five of 20 residents (R) (R#29, R#12, R#40, R#1, and R#141) reviewed for care planning.
Inspectors wrote2. Review of the admission Record, revealed R#1 was admitted on [DATE]. Review of R#1's physician orders (PO) dated 5/12/22, revealed Droplet Precautions x 10 days every shift for 10 Days and review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed the droplet precautions were schedule for completion on the end of the day shift, 3:00 p.m., on 5/22/22. Observation on 5/22/22 at 10:59 a.m. revealed outside R#1's room there were signs for Contact & Droplet Precaution and CDC signs for how to properly don and doff PPE. Continued observation on 5/22/22 revealed R#1 was taken to the therapy room without a mask by Physical Therapist (PT) VV who was only wearing a surgical mask and no gown or gloves. Continued observation revealed PT VV worked with R#1 for a half-hour and transported R#1 back to his room, without a gown or gloves. Interview on 5/22/22 at 11:34 a.m. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interview, policy review, and review of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines, the facility failed to offer three of five residents (R) (R#11, R#26, and R#241) reviewed for influenza/pneumonia vaccinations. Specifically, the facility failed to offer R#11, R#26, and R#241 and/or their representative the opportunity to be vaccinated with Pneumococcal 15-valent Conjugate Vaccine (PCV15) or Prevnar 20 (PCV20) in accordance with nationally recognized standards. In addition, the facility's pneumococcal vaccination data was not updated to reflect current CDC guidelines dated 1/27/22.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure that the staff COVID-19 vaccination rate was 100%, and that the facility's COVID-19 Vaccination Policy for staff was in accordance with Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) guidelines. The census was 44.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure written information on advance directives was provided to two of four residents (R), (R#12 and R#1), reviewed for advance directives.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interviews, and review of the facility policy titled Restraint Free Environment the facility failed to assess one resident (R) (R#141) for the safe use of a medical hand mitten (used to hinder disrupting medical treatment such as pulling out tubes) and/or an arm/hand restraint prior to implementation, failed to ensure there were physician orders to apply and remove restraint. In addition, the facility failed to obtain consent for the use of the restraint and failed to re-evaluate the continued use of the restraint.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review, and review of the facility policy titled Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation, the facility failed to implement the facility abuse policy by failing to ensure the references for the Administrator were checked prior to employment.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interviews, and review of the facility policy titled, Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation, the facility failed to ensure a thorough investigation was completed for an injury of unknown origin for one of three residents (R) R#1, reviewed for accidents.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation, interviews, and review of the facility policy titled, Fall Prevention Program, the facility failed to ensure one resident (R) (R#29) of three residents reviewed for accident hazards, identified potential risk factors to prevent further falls.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interviews, and review of facility policies, the facility failed to assess nutritional status after a significant weight loss and failed to notify the physician of the weight loss for one resident (R) (R#29), of three residents reviewed for nutrition.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interview, and review of the Facility Assessment, the facility failed to conduct and document a comprehensive facility-wide assessment to evaluate the characteristics of the resident population, community resources, and risks and failed to develop a plan to address these factors and deploy their resources in the most effective manner to maintain safety and security for all facility residents. The census was 44.
9 fire safety citations on file: 8 on July 18, 2024, 1 on May 25, 2022.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| July 18, 2024 | Fine | $4,017 |
| July 18, 2024 | Payment Denial | 2 days from October 16, 2024 |
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) | 3.63 | 3.56 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.55 | 0.50 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.38 | 3.10 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.27 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.82 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 42.1% | 46.0% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 50.0% | 44.5% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 3.72 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 3.73 on weekdays and 3.38 on weekends, 9% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 8.0% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 4.53 in April to June 2025 to 3.63 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 | 3.63 | 0.55 | 3.73 | 3.38 | 8.0% | 0 of 90 | 70 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.59 | 0.59 | 3.67 | 3.39 | 8.4% | 0 of 92 | 66 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.99 | 0.79 | 4.17 | 3.53 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 59 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 4.53 | 0.86 | 4.70 | 4.09 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 54 |
| 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.
| 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 | 25.4 | 15.3 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 0.9 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.6 | 2.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.8 | 3.2 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.9 | 2.6 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 12.8 | 15.2 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.8 | 5.6 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 28.8 | 19.9 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 29.9 | 25.0 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 11.2 | 11.6 | 12.0 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Mesun Health and Rehabilitation Center's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it better than the national rate (57.0% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
57.0% this home
Better than 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. 444 eligible stays.
13.3% this home
Worse than 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. 444 eligible stays.
7.1% 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. 242 eligible stays.
38.6% 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. 197 residents counted.
0.4% 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. 266 residents counted.
5.4% 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. 264 residents counted.
98.8% this home
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. 173 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: MESUN HEALTH SERVICES INC.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kim, Eugene | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 03/28/2022 | |
| Kim, Hanson | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Individual | 08/20/2020 | |
| Cotton, Danny | Corporate officer | Individual | 08/20/2020 | |
| Kim, Hanson | Corporate officer | Individual | 08/20/2020 | |
| Seol, Sukhee | Corporate officer | Individual | 08/22/2020 | |
| Radman, Bruce | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 08/22/2020 |
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.