Home / North Carolina / Hendersonville
1870 Pisgah Drive, Hendersonville, NC 28791 · Henderson County · (828) 693-9796
120 certified beds, about 108 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1989
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 345312 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on January 16, 2026, inspectors cited 2 health deficiencies (the North Carolina average is 4.7, the national average 9.2).
Of 34 health citations since August 2023, 3 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (2 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 2 fines totaling $101,733 in the last three years; the largest was $84,748, and the latest is dated February 5, 2025.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.35 hours per resident per day, against 3.85 across North Carolina and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.85 of those hours.
69.9% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (North Carolina average 49.0%).
CMS links it to Cch Healthcare, an affiliated group of 33 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 34 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to accurately code the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment in the area of weight loss for 2 of 4 residents whose MDS assessments were reviewed (Resident #8 and Resident #4).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to submit a request for a Level II Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) evaluation for residents previously determined to have a Level I status for a PASRR after a new serious mental disorder was identified for 3 of 3 residents reviewed for PASRR (Resident #99, Resident #12, Resident #101).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, photographic evidence review, and staff, Law Enforcement Officer, Wound Nurse Practitioner, and Medical Doctor interviews, the facility failed to protect a vulnerable resident's right to be free from physical restraints when Resident #1 was found with socks placed on each hand and held in place by rubber bands wrapped around each wrist for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for restraints (Resident #1). On 01/27/25 at approximately 12:00 AM, Resident #1 was observed with socks covering each hand that were secured with rubber bands wrapped around each wrist, effectively forming tourniquets (device often used in emergency situations to apply pressure to a limb or extremity to stop blood flow) on her wrists, but not in a controlled manner. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, photographic evidence review and staff interviews, the facility failed to implement their abuse policy and procedure when nursing staff failed to identify and immediately report the use of a physical restraint for a resident with no medical symptoms along with no assessment for the need for a physical restraint. Staff reported observing socks placed on Resident #1's hands held in place by rubber bands wrapped around each wrist on 01/24/25 without immediately reporting to the Administrator. On 01/27/25 at approximately 12:00 AM, Resident #1 was observed with socks covering each hand that were secured with rubber bands wrapped around each wrist, effectively forming tourniquets (device often used in emergency situations to apply pressure to a limb or extremity to stop blood flow) on her wrists, but not in a controlled manner. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, photographic evidence review and staff interviews, the facility failed to submit an initial report to the State Agency that included details that accurately reflected the cause and extent of a resident's injuries for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for abuse and restraints (Resident #1).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and staff interviews the facility failed to store a staff member's opened drink bottle separate from residents' stored food in 1 of 3 kitchen refrigerators. The facility failed to maintain and clean 1 of 1 milk cooler, 1 of 2 ice machines, and 1 of 1 floor kitchen drains, and 1 of 1 baking sheet storage rack. The facility failed to date an opened nutritional supplement in 1 of 1 nourishment refrigerators. This practice had the potential to affect one-hundred and five (105) residents who resided at the facility. Findings Included 1. On 10/29/24 at 9:13 AM an observation of the reach-in milk cooler was found with an opened soda bottle laying on top of stored milk cartons. The morning cook stated on 10/29/24 at 9:15 AM the opened soda bottle belonged to kitchen staff, and she was unsure which staff it belonged to. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff, Consultant Pharmacist and Nurse Practitioner (NP) interviews the facility failed to follow up on a consultant pharmacist recommended Gradual Dose Reduction attempt (GDR) for a resident. This was for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications (Resident #13). Findings Included: Resident #13 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnosis that included dementia and diabetes mellitus. A review of Resident #13's quarterly Minimal Dat Set (MDS) dated [DATE] coded her with severe cognitive impairment. She required supervision for eating and toileting, used a wheelchair for mobility and frequently incontinent of bowel and bladder. She was coded as receiving an antidepressant during the 7-day look back period. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review and interviews with staff the facility failed to provide a dependent and tall resident with a bed extender for (1 of 1) resident reviewed for accommodation of needs (Resident #256).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure the armrest of Resident #75's wheelchair remained in good repair for 1 of 3 wheelchairs observed for safe, clean and homelike environment.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observations, and interviews with the staff the facility failed to ensure the air mattress settings matched the resident's current weight for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for pressure ulcers (Resident #41 and #37).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review, and interviews with staff, the facility failed to follow their infection control policy and procedures regarding Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) during high-contact care activities for a resident with an indwelling catheter (Resident #75). This failure occurred for 2 of 2 nursing staff observed for infection control practices (Nurse Aide #2 and Nurse Aide #3).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff and Physician interviews the facility failed to provide incontinence care in a safe manner for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for accidents (Resident #3).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews with the Medical Doctor, Family Member, and staff the facility failed to initiate medical services for treatment of an acute change in the level of consciousness (LOC) when a resident (Resident #1) appeared lethargic and difficult to arouse. Neurological checks showed Resident #1 was drowsy at 8:30 AM with confused conversation and remained at the facility until emergency medical services was called at 5:47 PM resulting in a delay of treatment. Resident #1 was admitted to the hospital 3/31/2024 secondary to drowsiness and altered mentation. She remained in the hospital from [DATE] through 4/10/24 and received treatment for acute metabolic encephalopathy, acute on chronic hypoxemic respiratory failure with hypoxia, possible aspiration pneumonia, and pulmonary hypertension. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews with the Medical Doctor and staff the facility failed to notify the physician of a change in the resident's level of consciousness that resulted in delay in the treatment of a possible opioid overdose for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for notification (Resident #1).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews with the Police Detective and staff the facility failed to submit an initial report to the state agency no later than 2 hours after receiving an allegation of neglect that resulted in hospitalization for a suspected opioid overdose for a resident who was not prescribed opioids. This deficient practice was for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for abuse (Resident #1).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interviews the facility failed to verify or check the competency and skills of an agency nurse prior to providing care and services to residents for 1 of 2 staff reviewed for competency (Nurse #3).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observations, and staff interviews the facility failed to obtain active physician orders for medications observed at the bedside for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for self-administration of medications (Resident #3).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observations, and interviews with staff, the facility failed to maintain personal hygiene for a resident dependent on staff to clean and trim fingernails for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for activities of daily living (Resident #2).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observations, and staff interviews, the facility failed to serve fortified foods as directed by the physician's diet order for 2 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #1 and #2).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review, and staff interviews, the facility's Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) Committee failed to maintain implemented procedures and monitor the interventions that the committee put into place following the recertification and complaint investigation survey completed on 12/09/21 and the recertification survey completed on 08/04/23. This was for one repeat deficiency in the area of therapeutic diet prescribed by a physician originally cited on 12/09/21 during a recertification and complaint investigation survey, 08/04/23 during a recertification survey, and subsequently recited on 10/16/23 during the revisit and complaint investigation survey. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations of the meal service tray line, record review, interviews with the Registered Dietitian and staff, the facility failed to ensure residents received the correct portion sizes based on the menu approved by the Registered Dietitian and failed to separate fortified and non-fortified mashed potatoes served to residents. This failure had the potential to affect all residents receiving a meal tray.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review, resident, and staff interviews the facility failed to assess the ability of a resident to self-administer medications for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for self-administration of medication (Resident #21).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide completed Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC) and/or Skilled Nursing Facility Advanced Beneficiary Notices (SNF ABN) prior to discharge from Medicare Part A skilled services to 3 of 3 residents reviewed for beneficiary notification review (Residents #48, #33 and #72). Findings Included: 1. Resident #48 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident #48's medical record revealed no evidence a NOMNC or SNF-ABN were provided to Resident #48 or her Responsible Party (RP) when Resident #48's Medicare Part A skilled services ended on 06/17/23. Resident #48 remained in the facility. During an interview on 08/02/23 at 3:40 PM, the Business Office Manager explained she typically issued either a NOMNC or SNF-ABN to residents or their RP prior to Medicare skilled services ending. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to request a Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) Level II evaluation for a resident with a new mental health diagnosis for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for PASRR (Resident #23).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to request a Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) re-evaluation after a significant change in physical or mental status for 1 of 2 sampled residents reviewed for PASRR (Resident #16).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to develop a baseline care plan that addressed the resident's immediate needs within 48 hours of admission (Resident #128) and develop a baseline care plan for the presence of a surgical site that was covered by a PICO device (a single use negative pressure wound therapy device that promotes wound healing) (Resident #229) for 2 of 5 sampled residents reviewed for baseline care plans.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to develop a discharge care plan that addressed a resident's discharge goals and post-discharge needs for 1 of 2 sampled residents reviewed for discharge (Resident #58).
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and staff and Physician interviews the facility failed to obtain a Physician's order prior to administering a medication for nausea for 1 of 3 residents observed for medication administration (Resident #21).
Inspectors wrote2. Resident #47 was admitted to the facility 06/22/23 with diagnoses including heart failure and atrial fibrillation (irregular heartbeat). The significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #47 was moderately cognitively impaired and required total assistance with bathing. There were no rejection of care or other behaviors identified during the lookback period. Review of the bathing records for Resident #47 revealed she received a shower on 07/01/23, 07/05/23, and 07/12/23 no was checked on the bathing records with the question of Do toenails need to be cut?. Further review of Resident #47's bathing records revealed she received a bed bath on 07/20/23, 07/20/23, 07/26/23, and 07/31/23 and no was checked on the bathing records with the question of Do toenails need to be cut?. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observations, interviews with staff, and residents, the facility failed to secure medications stored at the bedside for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for medication storage.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observations, interviews with the Registered Dietitian and staff, the facility failed to serve fortified foods as directed by the physician's diet order for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for nutrition (Resident #18 and #29).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review, and interviews the facility's Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) committee failed to maintain implemented procedures and monitor interventions previously put in place following the recertification survey that occurred 08/04/23, and the recertification and complaint investigation survey that occurred 12/09/21. This failure was for 4 deficiencies that were originally cited in the areas of Label/Store Drugs and Biologicals (F-761), Therapeutic Diet Prescribed by Physician (F-808), Infection Control (F-880) and Develop/Implement a Comprehensive Care Plan (F-656) and were subsequently recited on the current recertification survey of 08/04/23. The continued failure of the facility during two surveys of record in the same area showed a pattern of the facility's inability to sustain an effective QAA program.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review, and staff interviews the facility failed to implement infection control for hand hygiene when 2 of 2 facility staff (Nurse Aide #1 and Nurse Aide #2) did not remove their gloves and perform hand hygiene after providing incontinence care for 1 of 2 residents observed for incontinence care (Resident #47).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and staff interviews the facility failed to label and properly store personal care equipment in shared bathrooms (rooms 500, 503, 504, 506, and 511) and maintain clean and sanitary room divider curtains (rooms 201-A, 201-B, 212-A, and 508-A) for 8 of 56 rooms and 2 of 4 halls (200 and 500 hall) reviewed for safe, clean and homelike environment.
11 fire safety citations on file: 6 on November 1, 2024, 5 on August 4, 2023.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| February 5, 2025 | Fine | $16,985 |
| April 25, 2024 | Fine | $84,748 |
| April 25, 2024 | Payment Denial | 47 days from May 24, 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) | 3.35 | 3.85 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.85 | 0.62 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.08 | 3.42 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.79 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.71 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 69.9% | 49.0% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 63.0% | 45.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 3.29 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 3.46 on weekdays and 3.08 on weekends, 11% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 55.6% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.36 in April to June 2025 to 3.35 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 | 3.35 | 0.85 | 3.46 | 3.08 | 55.6% | 0 of 90 | 108 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.45 | 0.90 | 3.56 | 3.19 | 64.2% | 0 of 92 | 105 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.36 | 0.95 | 3.47 | 3.08 | 64.4% | 0 of 92 | 103 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.36 | 1.03 | 3.50 | 3.01 | 68.3% | 0 of 91 | 100 |
| 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. If you work here, your report helps start one.
| 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 | 8.8 | 15.6 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.2 | 0.7 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.3 | 2.3 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 9.9 | 3.5 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.1 | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 8.5 | 18.3 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 8.0 | 5.5 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 7.4 | 14.0 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 18.8 | 22.9 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 16.1 | 12.9 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.2 | 1.8 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 4.2 | 1.8 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for The Greens at Hendersonville's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (51.7% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
51.7% this home
No different from 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. 76 eligible stays.
9.5% 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. 90 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. 55 eligible stays.
50.0% 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. 54 residents counted.
4.5% 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. 67 residents counted.
1.4% 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. 67 residents counted.
90.5% 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. 21 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: GREENS AT HENDERSONVILLE LLC. CMS links this home to Cch Healthcare, a group of 33 nursing homes averaging 2.5 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bync Holdings LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 07/01/2022 |
| Starlight Healthcare LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 50% | 07/01/2022 |
| Shogren, Paul | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 11/22/2022 | |
| Jeremias, Baruch | Corporate director | Individual | 07/01/2022 | |
| Stern, Jacob | Corporate director | Individual | 07/01/2022 | |
| Stern, Jacob | Corporate officer | Individual | 07/01/2022 |
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.