11611 Robious Road, Midlothian, VA 23113 · Chesterfield County · (804) 379-4771
120 certified beds, about 112 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1991
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 495257 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on September 13, 2023, inspectors cited 18 health deficiencies (the Virginia average is 14.3, the national average 9.2).
Of 54 health citations since March 2019, 2 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents.
CMS lists no fines against this home in the last three years.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.24 hours per resident per day, against 3.76 across Virginia and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.50 of those hours.
47.0% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Virginia average 48.1%).
CMS links it to Ciena Healthcare/Laurel Health Care, an affiliated group of 81 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 54 health citations on file.
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 five of 37 residents in the survey sample; Residents #100, #88, #91, #87, and #7.
Inspectors wrote2. For R7 the facility staff failed to identify the location of the pain, the type of pain and attempts of non-pharmacological interventions prior to the administration of a prn (as needed) pain medication, Tramadol (1). R7 was admitted with diagnosis that included but not limited to osteoarthritis (2) of the knee. On the most recent MDS (minimum data set), a quarterly assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 07/20/2023, the resident scored 15 out of 15 on the BIMS (brief interview for mental status), indicating R7 was cognitively intact for making daily decisions. Section J Pain Management coded R7 as having frequent pain at a pain level of six out of ten, with ten being the worse pain. R7's comprehensive care plan dated 02/22/2022 documented in part, Need. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to provide pharmacy services for one of 37 residents in the survey sample, Resident #310.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview, clinical record review and facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to ensure residents were free from unnecessary medications for four of 37 residents in the survey sample; Residents #100, #88, #91, and #7.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, resident interview, staff interview, clinical record review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to promote dignity for one of 37 residents, Resident #24.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, staff interview and facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to notify the physician medications not ordered and/or administered, for two of 37 residents in the survey sample, Resident #225 and Resident #87.
Inspectors wroteBased on resident interview, staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to promptly resolve a grievance for one of 37 residents in the survey sample, Resident #87.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview and clinical record review it was determined that the facility staff failed to maintain an accurate MDS (minimum data set) assessment for one of 37 residents, Resident #103.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to follow professional standards of practice for three of 37 residents in the survey sample, Residents #87, #55 and #225.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, resident interview, staff interview, clinical record review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to provide ADL (activities of daily living) for one of 37 residents, Resident #24.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview, clinical record review and facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to provide care and services for the treatment of pressure injuries for one of 37 residents in the survey sample; Resident #205.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, and clinical record review, it was determined that facility staff failed to provide respiratory care and services in a sanitary manner for one of 37 residents in the survey sample, Residents #21.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview, clinical record review and facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to evidence communication with the dialysis center for each dialysis visit for one of two residents in the survey sample that received dialysis services; Resident #91.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, resident interview, staff interview, facility document review, and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to ensure all bed rail requirements were met for one of 37 residents in the survey sample, Resident #87.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, resident interview, staff interview, clinical record review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to maintain sufficient nursing staff to ensure a resident's needs were met for one of 37 residents in the survey sample, Resident #24.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to provide a diet to meet a resident's needs for one of 37 residents in the survey sample, Resident #310.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, and facility document review it was determined facility staff failed to store food in a sanitary manner in one of one facility kitchens.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview and facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to post daily nurse staffing information prior to the start of the shift on two of three survey dates.
Inspectors wrote2. The facility staff failed to administer the correct physician prescribed dose of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine to Resident #317 (R317). On the most recent MDS (minimum data set), an admission assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 12/20/21, the resident scored 9 out of 15 on the BIMS (brief interview for mental status), indicating the resident is moderately impaired for making daily decisions. A review of R317's clinical record revealed a physician's order dated 12/16/21 for 0.3 ml (milliliters) of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine. A medication error report dated 12/16/21 documented R317 was administered 1.8 ml of the Pfizer vaccine. The report further documented the physician was notified, ordered intravenous normal saline at 50 ml per hour for one hour and R317 had no adverse outcome. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on resident interview, clinical record review, facility document review, and staff interview, it was determined that the facility staff failed to ensure a resident was free of a significant medication error for one of 51 residents in the survey sample, Resident #16 (R16). On 11/02/2021 at 10:00 p.m. and on 11/03/2021at 6:00 a.m., facility staff overdosed Resident # 16 R16 by administering 5ml (five milliliters) of Methadone (1), which was ten times the physician ordered dose, resulting in (R16's) oxygen saturation dropping to 77% and requiring administration of Narcan (2). The resident was taken to the hospital for further interventions and monitoring. The deficient practice resulted in harm to the resident.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, and facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to store and prepare food in a sanitary manner in one of one facility kitchens.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, resident interview, staff interview, clinical record review, facility document review, and in the course of a complaint investigation, it was determined that the facility staff failed to develop and/or implement a comprehensive care plan for 5 of 51 residents in the survey sample; Residents #216, #217, #112, and #16.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview, clinical record review, and facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to follow professional standards of practice for 1 of 51 residents in the survey sample; Resident #80. The facility staff failed to clarify physician's orders regarding parameters for the administration of PRN (as-needed) pain medication for Resident #80.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, facility document review, and in the course of a complaint investigation, it was determined that the facility staff failed to prepare food in a manner that was palatable for meal enjoyment.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview, clinical record review and facility document review, it was determined the facility staff failed to evidence a complete and accurate medical record for three of 51 residents in the survey sample, Resident #112, Resident #416 and Resident #3.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, resident interview, staff interview, clinical record review, and facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to provide privacy and dignity to 1 of 51 residents in the survey sample, Resident #216. The facility staff failed to maintain the Foley catheter bag in a manner to promote privacy and dignity for Resident #216.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, resident interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to facilitate a resident's right for self-determination and choice for 1 of 51 residents in the survey sample, Resident #313. Resident #313 (R313) verbalized the desire for bed rails. The facility staff failed to honor this preference and assess the resident for the use of bed rails.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to maintain a complete MDS (minimum data set) for 1 of 51 residents in the survey sample, Resident #35. The facility staff failed to complete the BIMS (brief interview for mental status) assessment for Resident #35's (R35) quarterly MDS assessment with an ARD (assessment reference date) of 1/14/22.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview, it was determined that the facility staff failed to evidence completion of a level 1 PASRR (preadmission screening and resident review) for 1 of 51 residents, Resident #62. The facility staff failed to complete a level 1 PASRR for Resident #62 who was admitted to the facility on [DATE].
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to develop a complete baseline care plan for 1 of 51 residents in the survey sample, Resident #316. The facility staff failed to develop Resident #316's (R316) baseline care plan to include the use of oxygen.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview, facility document review, and clinical record review, it was determined the facility staff failed to review and revise the care plan for two of 51 residents in the survey sample, Residents #53 and #216.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, clinical record review, staff interview and facility document review it was determined that the facility staff failed to provide treatment to promote healing of a pressure injury for 1 of 51 residents in the survey sample, Resident #3. The facility staff failed to follow professional standards of care when providing treatment to Resident #3's pressure injury on 3/23/2022. LPN (licensed practical nurse) #1 was observed using one piece of gauze to clean off three separate pressure injuries located on Resident #3.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, resident interview, staff interview, clinical record review and facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to provide respiratory services for three of 51 residents in the survey sample, Residents #1, #316 and #16.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, clinical record review, and facility document review, the facility staff failed to prevent a resident from receiving an unnecessary medication for one five residents in the medication administration observation, Resident #9. The facility staffadministered a double dose of nasal spray to Resident #9.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, resident interview, staff interview, clinical record review and facility document review, it was determined the facility staff failed to evidence a bed inspection was provided for one of 51 residents in the survey sample, Resident #412. The facility staff failed to perform bed rail inspections for the use of positioning/assist bars for Resident #412.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, resident interview, staff interview, family interview, facility document review, clinical record review, and in the course of a complaint investigation, it was determined the facility staff failed to maintain and clean, comfortable, homelike environment for two of 53 residents in the survey sample, Residents #20 and #92 and for 74 of 78 resident rooms. 1. The facility staff failed to clean and store a bedpan in a sanitary manner and failed to repair a hole in the cove base at the bottom of the wall in Resident #20's bathroom. 2. The facility staff failed to maintain Resident #92's bathroom in a sanitary manner and failed to repair a hole in the cove base at the bottom of the wall. 3. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, and clinical record review, it was determined that facility staff failed to provide respiratory care and services consistent with professional standards of practice for four of 53 residents in the survey sample, Residents # 9, # 104, # 55, and # 23. 1. The facility staff failed to store Resident # 9's BI-PAP [bi-level positive air pressure] (1) mask and tubing in a sanitary manner. During multiple observations of Resident 9's BI-PAP mask and tubing, revealed the mask was stored uncovered and not in a bag. 2. The facility staff failed to administer Resident #104's oxygen according to physician's orders. 3. The facility staff failed to administer Resident #55's oxygen according to the physician's order. 4. The facility staff failed to store Resident #23's respiratory equipment in a sanitary manner.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and staff interview, the facility staff failed to prepare and serve food in a sanitary manner in the kitchen. A dietary aide failed to secure their hair properly in a hair net, failed to wash their hands before beginning food preparation, and touched the eating surface of food plates with un-gloved hands.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to serve food in a manner to promote resident dignity for one of 53 residents in the survey sample, Resident # 264. The facility staff failed to serve food in a manner to promote dignity in the facility's main dining room. Resident # 264 waited twenty-two minutes to receive her lunch meal, after her tablemate was served and eating the lunch meal.
Inspectors wroteBased on resident interview, staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to implement the facility abuse policy for two of 53 residents in the survey sample, Residents #87 and #89. 1. On 2/14/19 Resident #37 reported an allegation that an employee had raped Resident #87. The facility staff failed to implement the abuse policy for reporting and completing a thorough investigation of the allegation. 2. The facility staff failed to implement the abuse policy for reporting a resident-to-resident altercation when Resident # 89 received a scratch under their eye on 12/07/18.
Inspectors wroteBased on resident interview, staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to report allegations of abuse within the required time frame for two of 53 residents in the survey sample, Residents #87 and #89. 1. On 2/14/19 Resident #37 reported an allegation that an employee had raped Resident #87. The facility staff failed to report this allegation to the state agency and other agencies according to law. 2. The facility staff failed to ensure timely reporting to the State Agency and other officials in accordance with state law when Resident # 89 received a scratch under their eye on 12/07/18 during a resident to resident altercation. The incident was not reported until 12/10/18.
Inspectors wroteBased on resident interview, staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to complete a thorough abuse investigation for one of 53 residents in the survey sample, Resident #87. On 2/14/19, Resident #37 reported an allegation that an employee had raped Resident #87. The facility staff failed to conduct a complete and thorough investigation regarding this allegation.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined the facility staff failed to evidence that all required information, including comprehensive care plan goals, was provided to the receiving hospital when one of 53 residents in the survey sample, Resident #20, was transferred to the hospital on [DATE] and 12/24/18. The facility staff failed to provide the receiving hospital with the Resident #20's comprehensive care plan goals during a facility initiated transfer to the hospital on [DATE] and 12/24/18.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview and clinical record review, it was determined the facility staff failed to provide written notification to the resident and/or resident representative and/or ombudsman of a facility initiated transfer for two for 53 residents in the survey sample, Residents #20 and #50. 1. The facility staff failed to provide written notification to Resident #20 or the responsible representative for the 12/17/18 and 12/24/18 facility initiated transfers to the hospital. 2. The facility staff failed to provide evidence that the Ombudsman was provided written notification of Resident #50's facility initiated transfer to the hospital on 1/14/19.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview, clinical record review and facility document review, it was determined that facility staff failed to update a baseline care plan for one of 53 residents in the survey sample, Resident # 53. The facility staff failed to update Resident # 53's baseline care plan concerning a fall on 02/11/19.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to develop and/or implement the comprehensive care plan for two of 53 residents in the survey sample, Residents #36, and #50. 1. The facility staff failed to develop a care plan to address Resident #36's urinary incontinence. 2. The facility staff failed to develop a comprehensive care plan to include Resident #50's risk for altered nutritional status based on the triggered Care Area Assessment (CAA) Summary - Nutritional Status from the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Section V dated 1/17/19.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, clinical record review and facility document review, it was determined that facility staff failed to review or revise the care plan for two of 53 residents in the survey sample, Resident # 53, and # 55. 1. The facility staff failed to update Resident # 53's comprehensive care plan concerning a fall on 02/15/19. 2. The facility staff failed to review and revise Resident #55's care plan to include oxygen administration.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to follow professional standards of practice for two of 53 residents in the survey sample, Residents #315 and #265. 1. The facility staff failed to clarify Resident #315's physician order regarding instruction for the removal of a lidocaine patch. 2. The facility staff failed to ensure that the physicians order for Resident # 265's prednisone (1) was transcribed to the MAR (medication administration record) accurately, resulting in Resident #265 not receiving the prescribed medication from June 12, 2018 through June 18, 2018.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview, facility document review, clinical record review and in the course of complaint investigation, it was determined that the facility staff failed to provide the necessary services to maintain good grooming, and personal hygiene for one of 53 residents in the survey sample, Resident #315. The facility staff failed to provide a shower and/or bath from 7/30/18 through 8/13/18, to Resident #315, who was coded as requiring extensive assistance of one with Activities of daily living.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined the facility staff failed to ensure two of 53 sampled residents, (Resident #92 and Resident #265), received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice and the comprehensive care plan. 1. The facility staff failed to have blood work drawn according to the physician orders for Resident #92. 2. The facility staff failed to administer Resident # 265's was prednisone (1) as prescribed by the physician. Resident #265's prednisone was not transcribed to the MAR (medication administration record) accurately, resulting in Resident #265 not receiving the prescribed medication from June 12, 2018 through June 18, 2018.
Inspectors wroteBased on resident interview, family interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined the facility staff failed to provide treatment and services to maintain or restore bladder and bowel function for one of 53 residents in the survey sample, Resident #92. The facility staff failed to implement a toileting plan to maintain or restore Resident #92's bladder and bowel function.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview and facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to ensure eight consecutive hours of RN (registered nurse) coverage. The facility staff failed to ensure eight consecutive hours of RN coverage for four days, 2/16/19, 3/2/19, 3/3/19 and 3/9/19.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined the facility staff failed to ensure one of 53 residents in the survey sample, received the treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice and the comprehensive care plan for Resident #92. The facility staff failed to obtain physician ordered laboratory tests for Resident #92.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, resident interview, staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined the facility staff failed to implement infection control practices for one of 53 residents in the survey sample, and in the kitchen, Residents #164. The facility staff failed to ensure the implementation of contact isolation precautions for Resident #164.
17 fire safety citations on file: 5 on September 13, 2023, 2 on March 24, 2022, 10 on March 14, 2019.
CMS lists no fines or payment denials against this home in the last three years. The national average is 0.9 fines per home.
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) | 3.24 | 3.76 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.50 | 0.69 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.79 | 3.29 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.90 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.84 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 47.0% | 48.1% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 33.3% | 48.2% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 3.44 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 3.43 on weekdays and 2.79 on weekends, 19% 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 3.34 in April to June 2025 to 3.24 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 | 3.24 | 0.50 | 3.43 | 2.79 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 112 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.34 | 0.44 | 3.52 | 2.86 | 0.1% | 0 of 92 | 109 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.22 | 0.41 | 3.35 | 2.88 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 114 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.34 | 0.33 | 3.53 | 2.86 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 114 |
| 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 | 9.8 | 14.8 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 1.6 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.5 | 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 | 13.8 | 15.6 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 9.1 | 4.7 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 11.2 | 14.2 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 23.4 | 22.3 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 7.9 | 11.5 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.1 | 1.5 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.1 | 1.5 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for The Laurels of Willow Creek's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (54.8% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
54.8% this home
No different from 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. 430 eligible stays.
10.0% 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. 422 eligible stays.
6.7% 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. 263 eligible stays.
64.6% 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. 158 residents counted.
1.2% 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. 246 residents counted.
2.6% 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. 246 residents counted.
98.2% this home
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. 54 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: Legal Business Name Not Available. CMS links this home to Ciena Healthcare/Laurel Health Care, a group of 81 nursing homes averaging 2.8 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership data not available |
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.