800 Volunteer Drive, Paris, TN 38242 · Henry County · (731) 642-2535
127 certified beds, about 103 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 2002
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 445462 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on July 8, 2026, inspectors cited 0 health deficiencies (the Tennessee average is 4.4, the national average 9.2).
Of 17 health citations since February 2020, 1 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents.
CMS lists 1 fine totaling $30,150 in the last three years; the largest was $30,150, and the latest is dated January 27, 2025.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.80 hours per resident per day, against 3.80 across Tennessee and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.46 of those hours.
52.7% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Tennessee average 48.9%).
CMS links it to Champion Care, an affiliated group of 22 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 17 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on policy review, observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to ensure residents received the necessary treatment and services consistent with professional standards of practice to promote healing for 9 of 9 (Residents #1, #2, #5, #11, #14, #15, #16, #18, and #19) reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility's failure to perform wound care treatments and weekly wound assessments in accordance with facility policy contributed to the deterioration of pressure ulcers/injury for Resident #14 and #18, resulting in Harm.
Inspectors wroteBased on policy review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to serve palatable food at a safe and appetizing temperature for 3 of 6 (Resident #7, #8, and #12) sampled residents reviewed for appetizing and palatable meals.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation and interview the facility failed to provide its resources effectively and efficiently to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident. The facility failed to maintain adequate supplies for staff or services necessary to provide for the needs of residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on policy review, medical record review, observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure the resident's right to be treated with dignity was maintained for 1 of 16 (Resident #7) residents sampled for dignity.
Inspectors wroteBased on policy review, medical record review, and interview the facility failed to develop a person-centered care plan for 1 of 19 (Resident # 11) residents reviewed for pressure ulcers.
Inspectors wroteBased on policy review, review of staff competency documentation, medical record review, observation and interview the facility failed to ensure licensed nurses had the skills and knowledge to detect changes in a resident's condition related to pressure ulcers for 9 of 9 (Residents #1, #2, #5, #11, #14, #15, #16, #18, #19) sampled residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on policy review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to provide a safe and sanitary environment to help prevent the transmission of infections when 1 of 2 Licensed Practical Nurses (LPN C) failed to perform hand hygiene during wound care and 5 of 5 (LPN C, LPN D, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) E, CNA F, and CNA G) staff failed to wear appropriate Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) for Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) during wound care.
Inspectors wroteBased on policy review, medical record review, and interview, the facility failed to include a resident or family member in the Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) Care Plan meeting for 2 of 12 sampled residents (Resident #3 and #18) reviewed for Care Plan Meetings.
Inspectors wroteBased on policy review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure 5 of 9 sampled residents (Resident #18, #22, #56, #65, and #154) had alternative food and menu choices.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, review of the meal tray card, observation, and interview, the facility failed to provide the appropriate equipment necessary to maintain the ability to drink independently for 1 of 5 sampled residents (Resident #22) reviewed for dining.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to care for a resident in a manner that maintained or enhanced their dignity for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #214) reviewed with indwelling urinary catheters.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Manual, medical record review, and interview, the facility failed to complete and transmit a MDS assessment within 14 days for 1 of 24 sampled residents (Resident #1) reviewed for Resident Assessment and transmission.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments were completed accurately for pressure ulcers for 1 of 24 sampled residents (Resident #22) reviewed.
Inspectors wroteBased on policy review, medical record review, and interview, the facility failed to develop and implement Care Plans related to antidepressants, diuretics, suprapubic catheter, nephrostomy tube site, and isolation precautions for 3 of 24 sampled residents (Resident #58, #67, and #214) reviewed.
Inspectors wroteBased on policy review, medical record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to document treatments for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #22) reviewed with pressure ulcers.
Inspectors wroteBased on policy review, medical record review, and interview, the facility failed to monitor the left nephrostomy site for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #214) reviewed with urinary conditions.
Inspectors wroteBased on policy review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure food was served under sanitary conditions when 1 of 23 staff members (Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) #1) handled food barehanded during dining observations.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| January 27, 2025 | Fine | $30,150 |
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 | Tennessee | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 3.80 | 3.80 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.46 | 0.60 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.26 | 3.31 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.99 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.35 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 52.7% | 48.9% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 41.7% | 43.2% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 2 |
CMS expects 3.85 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 4.02 on weekdays and 3.26 on weekends, 19% 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 3.62 in April to June 2025 to 3.80 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 | 3.80 | 0.46 | 4.02 | 3.26 | 8.0% | 0 of 90 | 103 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.94 | 0.44 | 4.12 | 3.48 | 4.8% | 0 of 92 | 104 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.70 | 0.48 | 3.91 | 3.15 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 99 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.62 | 0.40 | 3.85 | 3.05 | 5.6% | 2 of 91 | 94 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Tennessee, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.56 | 3.95 | 3.27 | 4.0% | 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. If you work here, your report helps start one.
| Job | Median | Middle half | Employed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tennessee, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $18.27 | $17.09 to $19.66 | 27,040 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $28.31 | $23.64 to $30.12 | 20,830 |
| Registered nurses | $39.18 | $36.28 to $45.79 | 72,200 |
| 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 | Tennessee | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 24.1 | 14.0 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.4 | 0.7 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.3 | 1.8 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 6.6 | 3.4 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.8 | 1.7 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 40.5 | 17.2 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 8.0 | 5.0 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 35.0 | 16.9 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 21.1 | 22.6 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 13.2 | 11.2 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 0.7 | 1.7 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.6 | 1.6 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Patriot Health and Rehabilitation Center's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (49.6% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
49.6% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · Tennessee: 62 better, 16 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. 175 eligible stays.
10.9% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Tennessee: 1 better, 7 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. 189 eligible stays.
5.8% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 7.1% · Tennessee: 2 better, 1 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. 104 eligible stays.
52.4% this home
Median of homes: Tennessee58.3% · 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. 63 residents counted.
1.1% this home
Median of homes: Tennessee0.8% · 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. 89 residents counted.
5.0% this home
Median of homes: Tennessee1.6% · 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. 89 residents counted.
98.1% this home
Median of homes: Tennessee98.7% · 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. 53 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: RIVERBEND HEALTH AND REHABILITATION CENTER LLC. CMS links this home to Champion Care, a group of 22 nursing homes averaging 2.2 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tn3 Opco Holdings LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 01/01/2025 |
| Fink, Ephraim | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Individual | 6% | 01/01/2025 |
| 800 Volunteer Drive Tn LLC | 5% or greater mortgage interest | Organization | 01/01/2025 | |
| Melton, Wendy | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/01/2025 | |
| Merrick, William | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/01/2025 | |
| 800 Volunteer Drive Tn LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 01/16/2025 | |
| Melton, Wendy | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/01/2025 | |
| Merrick, William | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/01/2025 | |
| Ruvel, Menachem | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/13/2025 | |
| Weinberg, Yisroel | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/13/2025 |
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 Tennessee. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.