414 Algonquin Rd, Hampton, VA 23661 · Hampton City County · (757) 722-9881
130 certified beds, about 117 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 1996
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 495308 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on August 25, 2023, inspectors cited 29 health deficiencies (the Virginia average is 14.3, the national average 9.2).
Of 54 health citations since March 2019, 1 was 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 3.48 hours per resident per day, against 3.76 across Virginia and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.32 of those hours.
70.5% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Virginia average 48.1%).
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 staff interview, clinical record review, and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to provide care and services to prevent the development of a pressure ulcer at an advanced stage for one Resident (Resident #413) in a survey sample of 64 Residents, resulting in harm for Resident #413. The facility self-identified this deficient practice before the survey, resulting in past non-compliance being achieved on 7/26/23.
Inspectors wroteBased on Resident interview, staff interview, facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to respond to Resident Council grievances These grievance included A) laundry not being returned timely B) items being lost, C) food not being good, D) lack of showers, E) cleanliness of the facility, and F) lack of cleaning in their rooms.
Inspectors wroteBased on Resident interview and staff interview the facility staff failed to uphold Resident Rights regarding the right to receive mail and receive mail unopened affecting 14 Residents (Resident #7, #13, #23, #41, #44, #47, #53, #58, #61, #67, #82, #84, #92, and Resident #98) in a survey sample of 64 Residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, clinical record, and facility documentation the facility staff failed to ensure residents are free from neglect and misappropriation of property for 21 Residents (#'s 42, 92, 23, 6, 363, 87, 52, 9, 38, 14, 97, 64, 7, 67, 78, 69, 56, 31, 364, 72, 88, 82 and 78), in a survey sample of 62 Residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, Resident Interview, Facility staff interview and record review, the facility staff failed to revise 1 of 64 sampled residents care plan.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, Resident interview, staff interview, clinical record review, and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to provide assistance with activities of daily living (ADL) for Residents who were dependent upon facility staff for such care, affecting 3 Residents (Resident #10, #29, and #87) in a survey sample of 64 Residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on resident and staff interviews, clinical record review and facility's documentation, the facility staff failed to ensure 2 of 64 residents (Resident #107 and #413) in the survey sample were free from the use of unnecessary medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure palatable food was served to six (of 104 residents Resident (R) 61, R36, R69, R35, R7, R87). Specifically, the food did not look appetizing and lacked flavor, the variety of menu offerings was limited, and an established recipe was not being followed correctly. This failure contributed to residents' ongoing reluctance to consume their meals, an overall dissatisfaction with their dining experience and the deviation from established recipes left residents' health and well-being at risk.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, resident interviews, record review and facility policy review the facility failed to follow the prescribed diet and honor food preferences for two (Residents (R) 69 and 35) of two residents sampled for food preferences, out of a survey sample of 35 residents. Specifically, R69 was not aware of alternate food options and had not had her food preferences updated since admission and R35 was receiving food that did not meet her taste and nutrition preferences. The failure to accommodate the residents' dietary choices and preferences violates their right to person centered care, potentially resulting in a diminished quality of life and potential negative health consequences.
Inspectors wroteBased on Resident interviews, staff interviews, and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to provide snacks to Residents affecting multiple Residents on 3 of 3 nursing units.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, it was determined the facility failed to implement a comprehensive antibiotic stewardship program. This failure had the possibility of negatively impacting all residents in the facility. In addition, the facility staff failed to follow their antibiotic stewardship program by ensuring the Resident did not receive antibiotics that were inappropriate for 2 (residents 107 and 413) of 64 sampled residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interviews, facility document review, and clinical record review, the facility staff failed to afford a Resident the ability to make decisions in concerning their care for 1 of 64 residents (Resident #87), in the survey sample.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, clinical record review and facility documentation the facility staff failed to promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of Resident's choice, for 1 Resident in a survey sample of 64 Residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interviews, clinical record review and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to ensure 1 of 64 residents (Resident #87) had an accurate medical record for an advanced directive.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, Resident interview, staff interview and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to maintain a homelike environment for one Resident (Resident #32) in a survey sample of 64 Residents.
Inspectors wrote2. For Resident #98 the facility failed to accurately assess Resident #98 in the MDS (Minimum Data Set) with an ARD (assessment reference date of 8/2/23. On 8/23/98 at approximately 9:58 AM Resident #98 was observed sitting in his wheelchair watching the TV. Resident #98 was asked about his mobility, and he stated I cannot feel my legs other than the spasms I get from my back to my legs and then from the legs down with the neuropathy pain too. When asked if he could safely transfer on and off the toilet he stated, I manage ok, some days I need more. When asked if he could walk unassisted, he stated that he could not. The Resident stated that anything involving the legs down he needed assistance with. When asked does he get the assistance he needs when he requests it, he stated that he needs help with shower because if he bends over to wash his feet, he will fall out of the shower chair. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on facility staff interviews, clinical record review and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to incorporate the recommendations from a level II PASARR (preadmission screening and resident review) into the Resident's assessment and care planning for one Resident (Resident #10) in a survey sample of 64 Residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interview and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure one of seven residents (Resident (R) 91) reviewed for Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) had a Level One PASARR completed prior to admission. This failure had the potential for R91 to not receive services necessary for mental health and psychosocial well-being.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview and record review, the facility staff failed to follow physician orders for the application of ace wraps to the bilateral lower extremities.
Inspectors wroteBased on Resident interview, facility staff interview, clinical record review and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to ensure that Residents were free from accident hazards, affecting one Resident (Resident #29) in a survey sample of 64 Residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to A) coordinate services to ensure she arrived at dialysis timely and B) provide meals and snacks for one (Resident #29) in a survey sample of 64 Residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to perform annual performance reviews for 2 (CNA's) Certified Nursing Assistants (CNA B, and CNA C) to provide regular education based upon the review outcome.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, clinical record review and facility documentation the facility staff failed to ensure a resident who diagnosed with mental disorder or a history of trauma and/or post-traumatic stress disorder, receives appropriate treatment for 1 Resident (#98) in a survey sample of 64 Residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview, clinical record review and facility document review, the facility staff failed to ensure 2 of 64 residents (#34 and #85) in the survey sample were free of significant medication errors.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, Resident interview, staff interview and facility documentation review, the facility staff failed to provide beverages in accordance with Resident's preferences for one Resident (Resident #85) in a survey sample of 64 Residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure all staff followed neutropenic precautions for one of one resident (Resident (R)163) by not donning personal protective equipment (PPE) prior to entering the R163's room. This failure had the potential of exposing R163 to an infectious disease.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and interview the facility failed to ensure all residents received or were offered an influenza and pneumococcal vaccinations for two (Resident (R) 80 and R97) out of five sampled residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, Resident interview and facility staff interviews, the facility staff failed to maintain equipment in a safe operating condition for one Resident (Resident #82 ) in a survey sample of 64 Residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, observation, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure two of a sample of 64 residents (Resident (R) 27 and R81) were provided with a functional call light for use when assistance could be needed. This failure had the potential to adversely affect the timeliness of care or response time in case of an urgent or emergent need.
Inspectors wroteBased on resident interview, staff interview, clinical record review and facility document review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to ensure five of 49 sampled residents; Resident #62, #40, #72, #86, and 1 closed record resident; Resident #191, who were unable to carry out Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) received showers.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, clinical record review, staff interviews and facility document review the facility staff failed to ensure that 1 of 44 residents (Resident #32) in the survey sample was provided ongoing resident centered activity services based on the resident's activity preferences from May through August of 2021.
Inspectors wroteBased on resident interview, staff interview, facility document review, clinical record review and in the course of a complaint investigation, it was determined that the facility staff failed to maintain a complete and accurate clinical record for four of 49 sampled residents, Resident #18, #1, #391 and #90.
Inspectors wroteBased on resident interview, staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to ensure access to resident funds for one of 49 sampled residents; Resident #49.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview, facility document review, and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to ensure that the care plan or care plan goals were sent with two of 49 sampled residents at the time of an acute care transfer for Resident #62 and #18.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, clinical record review, staff interviews and facility document review the facility staff failed to ensure that a Level I Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) was conducted prior to admission or within 30 days of admission to the nursing facility for 1 of 44 residents in the survey sample, Resident #23 with diagnoses of mental disorders.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined that facility staff failed to ensure an accurate oxygen therapy care plan for one of 49 sampled residents; Resident #1.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, resident interviews, staff interviews, and clinical record reviews, the facility's staff failed to ensure care and services were provided to meet professional standards of quality for 2 residents (Resident #30 and Resident #1) in the survey sample. The facility staff failed to obtain a physician's order prior to use of a seat belt for Resident #30, and to obtain daily weights as ordered by the physician for Resident #1.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined that facility staff failed to clarify orders for the use of oxygen AND failed to follow oxygen orders for one of 49 residents in the survey sample, Resident #1.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview, facility document review and clinical record review, it was determined that the facility staff failed to coordinate care with the dialysis center for one of 49 sampled residents; Resident #62.
Inspectors wroteBased on resident interview, staff interview, and facility document review it was determined that the facility staff failed to ensure nurses were competent in calibrating their recently acquired Blood Glucose Monitoring System (1) (glucose meter) per policy and manufacturers recommendations.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review and staff interviews, the facility staff failed to procure medications (hydrocortisone cream and scheduled topical pain relief medication) timely for one resident (Resident #23) in a survey sample of 49 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations during medication pour and pass, staff interviews, and clinical record review, the facility's staff failed to ensure a resident didn't experience a significant medication error (blood sugar orders were duplicated and insulin was administered outside of parameters, too close to the next possible dose) for 1 of 44 residents (Resident #10), in the survey sample.
Inspectors wroteBased on general observations, staff, resident and group interview, the facility staff failed to ensure the resident who have authorized the facility to manage their personal funds have ready and reasonable access to those funds.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, resident interview, staff interview, and facility document review, it was determined that facility staff failed to implement abuse policies and report an allegation of abuse to the appropriate state agencies for one of 38 residents in the survey sample, Resident #75. For Resident #75, facility staff failed to implement abuse policies and report an allegation of verbal abuse reported to the administrator on 3/20/19 to the appropriate state agencies.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, resident interview, staff interview, and facility document review, it was determined that facility staff failed to report an allegation of abuse to the appropriate state agencies for one of 38 residents in the survey sample, Resident #75. For Resident #75, facility staff failed to report an allegation of verbal abuse reported to the administrator on 3/20/19 to the appropriate state agencies.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview, facility document review, and clinical record review, it was determined that facility staff failed to evidence that all the required information was provided to the receiving provider for a facility-initiated transfer for 3 of 38 residents in the survey sample; Resident #82, #60, and #28. 1. For Resident #82, facility staff failed to send care plan goals at the time of a facility-initiated transfer to the hospital on 2/26/19. 2. The facility staff failed to ensure that Resident #60's Plan of Care Summary Goals were sent upon discharge to the hospital on [DATE], 2/6/18, and 3/2/19. 3. The facility staff failed to convey Resident #28's Individual Plan of Care summary upon discharge to the local acute care hospital on [DATE]
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, staff interviews, and facility document review the facility staff failed to issue bed-hold notices and policy at the time of discharge for 1 of 38 residents (Resident #28) in the survey sample. The facility's staff failed to provide written information to the resident or resident representative which specifies the duration of the bed-hold policy upon transfer to the local acute care hospital on [DATE] for Resident #28.
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review, staff interview and review of the facility's policy, the facility staff failed to accurately code the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for 1 of 38 residents (Residents #21), in the survey sample. The facility staff failed to accurately code Resident #21's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], at section N0350 (Insulin Injections).
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview, facility document review, and clinical record review, it was determined that facility staff failed to review and revise the care plan for one of 38 residents in the survey sample, Resident #98. For Resident #98, facility staff failed to revise the care plan when his code status changed to DNR (Do Not Resuscitate) and was ordered for comfort care measures.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, resident interview, clinical record review, and staff interviews, the facility staff failed to ensure residents received necessary foot care to maintain good foot health, for 1 of 38 residents (Residents #76), in the survey sample. The facility staff failed to ensure Resident #76's toe nails were not overgrown, thick and discolored.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and staff interview it was determined that facility staff failed to dispose garbage and refuse properly for one of three facility dumpsters, the third facility dumpster. Facility staff failed to ensure one of three facility dumpsters was free from surrounding debris.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, staff interviews and clinical record review the facility staff failed to ensure infection control measures were utilized to prevent the spread of infections, illnesses and diseases for 1 of 38 residents in the survey sample, Resident #51. Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) #6 failed to don (to put on) gloves and gown (PPE/Personal Protective Equipment) before entering a contact precaution room and failed to perform proper hand hygiene after completing wound care on Resident #51.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, resident, group and staff interviews the facility staff failed to have ensured that the names, addresses and telephones numbers of all State resident advocacy groups and the State survey agency were legible and posted in a conspicuous place and position accessible to the facility residents. Upon the State survey and certification agency's team entrance into the facility and during the orientation tour the posting of information on the advocacy groups and State survey agency was noted to be illegible in small print and in a position on the wall and hallway inaccessible to the residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, resident, group and staff interviews it was determined that the facility staff failed to post a notice that indicated where the survey results were located for their examination without having to ask someone. The facility staff failed to ensure survey results were easily available to the resident without having to ask.
14 fire safety citations on file: 6 on August 25, 2023, 7 on September 2, 2021, 1 on March 22, 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) | 3.48 | 3.76 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.32 | 0.69 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.09 | 3.29 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.93 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.23 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 70.5% | 48.1% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 75.0% | 48.2% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 3.74 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 3.64 on weekdays and 3.09 on weekends, 15% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 21.6% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.42 in April to June 2025 to 3.48 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 | 3.48 | 0.32 | 3.64 | 3.09 | 21.6% | 0 of 90 | 117 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 2.98 | 0.32 | 3.15 | 2.53 | 13.7% | 0 of 92 | 117 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.57 | 0.40 | 3.75 | 3.11 | 20.0% | 0 of 92 | 114 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.42 | 0.46 | 3.59 | 2.97 | 14.4% | 0 of 91 | 118 |
| 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 | 16.9 | 14.8 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.2 | 0.4 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.3 | 1.6 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.9 | 3.6 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.8 | 1.3 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 23.6 | 15.6 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.7 | 4.7 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 14.6 | 14.2 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 25.0 | 22.3 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 11.6 | 11.5 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.0 | 1.5 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.7 | 1.5 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Waterview Health & Rehab Center's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (53.1% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
53.1% 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. 87 eligible stays.
10.8% 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. 92 eligible stays.
8.2% 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. 62 eligible stays.
47.9% 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. 48 residents counted.
1.3% 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. 76 residents counted.
5.3% 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. 76 residents counted.
100.0% 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. 25 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: WATERVIEW SNF OPERATIONS LLC.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| VA 3 Opco Holdco LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 03/01/2023 |
| Bsd Eom Irrevocable Trust | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 25% | 03/01/2023 |
| Hlhk Irrevocable Trust | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 25% | 03/01/2023 |
| South East Virginia Hold Co LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 25% | 03/01/2023 |
| Vogue NHC LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 25% | 03/01/2023 |
| Jones, Garrett | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 03/01/2023 | |
| Hartstein, Jake | Corporate officer | Individual | 03/01/2023 |
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.