Home / North Carolina / Monroe
3510 West Highway 74, Monroe, NC 28110 · Union County · (704) 291-8500
90 certified beds, about 83 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 2014
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 345566 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on June 25, 2026, inspectors cited 2 health deficiencies (the North Carolina average is 4.7, the national average 9.2).
Of 27 health citations since February 2024, 5 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (2 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 2 fines totaling $197,532 in the last three years; the largest was $163,537, and the latest is dated July 1, 2024.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.97 hours per resident per day, against 3.85 across North Carolina and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.77 of those hours.
47.2% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (North Carolina average 49.0%).
CMS links it to Pruitthealth, an affiliated group of 96 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, record reviews, and staff interviews, the facility failed to have a medication error rate of less than 5% as evidenced by 3 medication errors out of 25 opportunities, resulting in a medication error rate of 12% for 1 of 3 residents observed for medication administration (Resident #307).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interviews with the Nurse Practitioner, pharmacist, and staff, the facility failed to administer scheduled medications in the correct form when the nurse crushed 2 tablets and opened 1 capsule of extended-release and delayed-release medications for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for significant medication errors (Resident #307).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff and Medical Director interviews the facility failed to administer scheduled medication as ordered by the physician for 7 of 24 residents on the 500 hall reviewed for medication administration (Resident #339, Resident #335, Resident #20, Resident #13, Resident #43, Resident #8, Resident #11).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, Medical Director and staff interviews, the facility failed to have sufficient staff in the facility to administer medications as ordered to the 500 hall/unit for 17 of 24 residents reviewed for medication administration (Resident #339, Resident #335, Resident #20, Resident #56, Resident #338, Resident #38, Resident #63, Resident #19, Resident #336, Resident #333, Resident #11, Resident #13, Resident #45, Resident #26, Resident #29, Resident #337, Resident #8).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff and Medical Director interviews the facility failed to administer scheduled medication as ordered by the physician for 17 of 24 residents (Resident #339, Resident #335, Resident #20, Resident #56, Resident #338, Resident #38, Resident #63, Resident #19, Resident #336, Resident #333, Resident #11, Resident #13, Resident #45, Resident #26, Resident #29, Resident #337, Resident #8) on the 500 hall when there was no nurse assigned to administer medication. This practice resulted in significant medication errors.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, resident, Resident Representative, and staff interviews, the facility failed to conduct quarterly care conferences with residents and their families for 3 of 3 residents reviewed for care conferences (Resident #25, Resident #12, and Resident #41).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, and Nurse Practitioner (NP) and staff interviews, the facility failed to notify the physician of an unsuccessful attempt to insert a midline intravenous (IV) line (long, thin, flexible tube that is inserted into a large vein in the upper arm) for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for notification (Resident #80).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observations, and staff and Nurse Practitioner interviews the facility failed to protect Resident #1's and Resident #2's right to be free from sexual abuse. On 6/16/24 staff (Nurse Aide #1, Nurse Aide #2, and Nurse #1) observed Resident #1 (female) in Resident #2's (male) room. Resident #2 was lying on his back on the bed naked from the waist down and Resident #1 was on top of him with her brief and pants down at her ankles. Resident #2 had one hand on his erect penis and was trying to insert his penis in Resident #1, and he was touching her private parts with his other hand. Approximately 30 minutes after the residents were separated, Nurse Aide #2 observed Resident #1 back in Resident #2's room with her hands on the front of his pants and was attempting to remove them. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observations, and staff interviews the facility failed to implement their abuse policy by failing to immediately implement protective measures when Nurse Aide #1 and Nurse Aide #2 observed two residents with severe cognitive impairment (Resident #1 and Resident #2) engaged in sexual activity that they did not have the capacity to consent to and the staff did not immediately separate the residents to provide protection from further abuse. The residents remained engaged in the sexual act until Nurse #1 arrived at the room and instructed Nurse Aide #1 and Nurse Aide #2 to separate the residents. Approximately 30 minutes after the residents were separated, Nurse Aide #2 observed Resident #1 back in Resident #2's room with her hands on the front of his pants and she was attempting to remove them. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews, resident, family member, and staff interviews, the facility failed to protect residents' dignity when residents were left soiled in feces and saturated in urine for 4 of 17 residents reviewed for dignity issues (Resident #192, Resident #34, Resident #48, and Resident #69), and failed to provide a dignity cover over a urinary catheter drainage bag for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for urinary catheters (Resident #390). Resident #192, Resident #34, Resident #48, and Resident #69 reported they felt upset, angry, mad, and like they did not matter at all when they were not provided incontinence care. Resident #390 felt upset that everyone could see my urine. The reasonable person concept was applied for Resident #48 due to her inability to express her feelings and a reasonable person would feel humiliated and degraded having to holler for assistance.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record reviews, and staff, resident, Nurse Practitioner, and Medical Director interviews, the facility failed to provide sufficient nursing staff which resulted in residents being treated in an undignified manner when left incontinent of urine or stool (Resident #192, #34, #48, and #69) and when a urinary catheter bag was left uncovered (Resident #390). These residents reported feeling upset, angry, mad and unimportant. The facility failed to provide sufficient nursing staff to assist with activities of daily living (ADL) care for dependent residents (Resident #192, #34, #69, #48, and #339). The facility failed to supervise a resident who was at high-risk for falls which resulted in acute cervical 6, cervical 7 and 1 thoracic fractures due to a fall (Resident #16). This affected 9 of 86 residents reviewed for sufficient nursing staff.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff, Nurse Practitioner, (NP) #1 and Medical Director (MD) interviews, observations and record review, the facility failed to supervise Resident #16 who was cognitively impaired and impulsive. The resident was eating in a dining room without any staff present in the room and with the back of her wheelchair positioned in front of a stone hearth. While passing trays on the 300 hall, NA #8 observed Resident #16 aggressively bounce her wheelchair and suddenly flip her wheelchair backwards hitting her head on the stone fireplace. This accident resulted in acute cervical 6, cervical 7 and thoracic 1 fractures. The fall on 12/23/23 resulted in pain at a level of 6 out of 10 and the use of a hard cervical collar. This was for 1 of 6 residents reviewed for accidents (Resident #16).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record reviews and interviews of residents, family member, and staff, the facility failed to provide incontinence care for dependent residents (Resident #192, Resident #34, Resident #69, Resident #48, and Resident #339), and failed to provide bathing for a dependent resident (Resident #339) for 5 of 16 residents reviewed for activities of daily living.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation and interview of facility staff, the facility failed to label/date an opened vial of tuberculin (injectable solution to test for tuberculosis) and failed to discard an opened expired vial of tuberculin for 2 of 2 medication storage refrigerators observed on the short-term hall and long-term hall respectively.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, and resident, family and staff interviews, the facility failed to have an effective system to ensure there was sufficient and competent dietary staff available on 12/31/23 to serve breakfast. This failure had the potential to impact all residents who received meals from the kitchen.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review, resident, family member, physician, nurse practitioner, and staff interviews, the facility's Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement committee (QAPI) failed to maintain implemented procedures and monitor the interventions that the committee put into place in following the complaint investigation of 3/12/2021 and 10/22/2021, and the recertification and complaint investigation of 6/30/2022. This was for 4 deficiencies in the areas of F677 Activities of Daily Living (ADLs), F842 Accuracy of Records, F684 Quality of Care/Professional Standards, and F883 Influenza and Pneumococcal Immunizations. These deficiencies were recited on the current recertification and complaint investigation survey of 2/16/2024. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review, resident, and staff interview the facility failed to assess a resident's ability to self-administer medications for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for medications at bedside (Resident #440 and Resident #194).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interviews and record review, the facility failed to revise a care plan for falls to include a new intervention on 12/27/23 for anti-tippers to a wheelchair. This was for 1 of 6 residents reviewed for accidents (Resident #16).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff and medical director interviews, the facility failed to obtain daily weights as ordered for a resident with heart failure and prescribed a diuretic (Resident #70). This was for 1 of 8 residents reviewed for nutrition.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview of facility staff, the facility failed to follow the physician's order to obtain a urine sample for urinalysis and culture and sensitivity (to evaluate for a urinary tract infection) for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for urinary catheter/urinary tract infection (Resident #343).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observations and staff interviews, the facility failed to administer oxygen at the prescribed rate for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for respiratory care (Resident #18).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, Nurse Practitioner and staff interviews, the facility failed to obtain x-ray results for a resident with nausea and poor appetite (Resident #70). This was for 1 of 8 residents reviewed for nutrition.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to maintain complete and accurate medical records in the area of wound care (Resident #70) for 1 of 1 resident records reviewed for surgical wound care.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and staff interviews, the facility failed to administer an influenza vaccine for a resident who signed a consent form to receive an influenza vaccine or document an influenza vaccine was received for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for infection control (Resident #58).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to complete mandatory twelve hours of annual in-services training for 2 of 5 Nursing Aides (NA #22, and NA #23) reviewed.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff and Responsible Party (RP) interviews, the facility failed to notify a Residents RP in writing of a hospital transfer. This was for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for hospitalization(Resident #16 and Resident #19).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interviews the facility failed to complete residents Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments within the required time. This was for 4 of 34 active residents reviewed for MDS completion (Residents #16, #19, #8, and #18).
7 fire safety citations on file: 4 on May 12, 2025, 3 on February 16, 2024.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| July 1, 2024 | Fine | $33,995 |
| February 16, 2024 | Fine | $163,537 |
| February 16, 2024 | Payment Denial | 49 days from March 12, 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 | North Carolina | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 3.97 | 3.85 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.77 | 0.62 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.37 | 3.42 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.22 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.98 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 47.2% | 49.0% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 43.5% | 45.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 3.76 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 4.21 on weekdays and 3.37 on weekends, 20% 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 3.97 in April to June 2025 to 3.97 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 | 3.97 | 0.77 | 4.21 | 3.37 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 83 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.80 | 0.74 | 4.03 | 3.24 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 84 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 4.13 | 0.84 | 4.37 | 3.50 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 80 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.97 | 0.97 | 4.23 | 3.33 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 83 |
| 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 | 18.1 | 15.6 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.3 | 0.7 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.0 | 2.3 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.4 | 3.5 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.0 | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 21.9 | 18.3 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.0 | 5.5 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 15.3 | 14.0 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 26.2 | 22.9 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 10.4 | 12.9 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 0.9 | 1.8 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.1 | 1.8 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Pruitthealth-Union Pointe's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it better than the national rate (62.4% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
62.4% this home
Better than 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. 231 eligible stays.
10.7% 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. 240 eligible stays.
6.8% 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. 137 eligible stays.
55.4% 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. 74 residents counted.
4.3% 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. 116 residents counted.
4.4% 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. 116 residents counted.
93.6% 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. 47 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: THE HERITAGE OF UNION COUNTY, LLC. CMS links this home to Pruitthealth, a group of 96 nursing homes averaging 3 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| United Health Services of North Carolina Inc | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 99% | 05/31/2022 |
| Olarte-Helbing, Marissa | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 08/26/2019 | |
| Pruitt, Neil | Corporate director | Individual | 03/14/2008 | |
| Pruitt, Neil | Corporate officer | Individual | 03/14/2008 | |
| Pruitthealth Inc | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 09/25/2007 |
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.