Not rated by CMS — ratings are suppressed for new or low-volume facilities.
A standard survey is most likely before around November 2026
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of June 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Frederick Villa Healthcare during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident admitted with STEMI, CHF, atrial fibrillation, chronic embolism and thrombosis of deep veins, and hypertensive heart disease with heart failure had anticoagulant therapy changed from Eliquis to Xarelto per the hospital discharge summary, and Xarelto was ordered by the physician on admission. However, the baseline care plan created within 48 hours did not list the anticoagulant among current medications and did not include a care plan for anticoagulant therapy. The DON confirmed the resident was receiving Xarelto at admission and that it should have been included in the baseline care plan.
Facility staff failed to develop a comprehensive, person-centered care plan for a resident admitted with paraplegia, severe malnutrition, and multiple Stage IV pressure ulcers. The existing care plan included only general goals and basic interventions such as repositioning and nonspecific wound/dressing care, without specifying dressing types or frequencies. It omitted key interventions to prevent worsening heel ulcers (e.g., heel elevation or heel boots), did not address the ordered wound vac or required monitoring for seal integrity, infection, bleeding, or fluid leakage, and did not specify the type of mattress needed. During review, the DON acknowledged that the care plan was not comprehensive for the resident’s pressure wounds.
A resident admitted after a cerebral infarction with hemiplegia and hemiparesis had been diagnosed with a UTI in the hospital and started on Amoxicillin 500 mg TID, with instructions on the discharge summary to continue the antibiotic for five additional days. On review, the MAR contained no documentation that the Amoxicillin was administered after admission. During interviews, the DON reported having reviewed the discharge summary but believed the antibiotic had been completed in the hospital, and another staff member explained that the facility’s second-day chart check process for new admissions likely failed to identify and implement the ongoing antibiotic order.
A resident with a history of STEMI, CHF, A-fib, chronic embolism/DVT, and hypertensive heart disease was discharged from the hospital with instructions to switch from Eliquis to Xarelto, including a loading dose followed by a maintenance dose. Although Xarelto was ordered on admission, multiple erroneous Eliquis orders were entered by the pharmacy and verified by an LPN supervisor, then repeatedly discontinued by an RN Unit Manager who recognized that only Xarelto was intended. Despite these actions, Eliquis continued to appear on the MAR, and an LPN ultimately administered Eliquis 5 mg together with Xarelto 15 mg during a morning med pass, resulting in both anticoagulants being given concurrently and increasing the resident’s risk for bleeding.
Surveyors found that the facility failed to maintain complete and accurate medical records for two residents. One resident with paraplegia, multiple stage 4 pressure ulcers, a colostomy, and severe malnutrition had missing weekly wound care notes after an EMR system change, incomplete documentation of ordered colostomy output monitoring, and no nursing notes of nausea or vomiting despite staff recollections and a PRN ondansetron order. The same resident’s change-in-condition documentation omitted reported respiratory issues that were later reflected in hospital records and by the RN who sent the resident out. For both this resident and another recently admitted resident, there were care plan invitation letters but no corresponding documentation in the EMR that required care plan meetings after admission actually occurred, as confirmed by the regional social worker.
A deficiency was identified when ongoing pest infestations, including roaches, mice, ants, spiders, and other insects, were repeatedly documented in multiple care areas and common spaces. Despite the use of a pest management company, the NHA confirmed the continued presence of pests, and a complaint was filed regarding the issue. Surveyor review of logs and staff interviews confirmed that the facility's pest control program was not effective.
The facility did not ensure timely reporting of multiple allegations of abuse, neglect, and theft to the appropriate authorities. Several residents reported rough treatment, derogatory comments, delayed care, and missing property, but these incidents were not consistently documented or reported as required. Leadership interviews confirmed lapses in recognizing and reporting these events, resulting in noncompliance with regulatory standards.
Multiple residents reported staff being rough, making inappropriate comments, or providing aggressive care, but the facility did not conduct timely or thorough investigations or document required assessments. In several cases, allegations were not immediately reported, investigated, or followed up with resident assessments, and staff interviews and protective measures were lacking.
Surveyors found that two residents experienced persistent pest infestations, including flies and gnats, in their rooms, with complaints also referencing ants and mice. Maintenance staff did not routinely check rooms unless issues were reported, and pest control measures were insufficient to resolve the problem. Additionally, another resident's room was observed to have longstanding maintenance issues, such as unpainted walls, a corroded faucet, loose plaster, a displaced ceiling tile, and a non-functioning light, all of which contributed to an environment that was not safe, clean, or homelike.
A staff member used a resident's bank card and account information to withdraw funds for personal use, with multiple unauthorized transactions identified through a police investigation. The administrator was unaware of the extent of the staff member's actions and could not confirm if the resident received the withdrawn funds, despite facility policy prohibiting such conduct.
A resident's discharge paperwork was found to be incomplete, with missing information in several sections of the discharge planning tool, including responsible party details, physician information, required signatures, and the medication list. Staff interviews confirmed that all sections should have been completed prior to discharge, but this was not done, and the DON acknowledged the concern.
Surveyors identified that two residents did not have baseline care plans, including medication lists, properly provided or documented within 48 hours of admission. In both cases, required signatures and evidence of delivery to the resident or their representative were missing, and documentation was not present in the EHR as expected. Staff interviews confirmed the deficiencies in the care plan process.
A resident lost the ability to perform activities of daily living (ADLs) without a documented medical reason, as the facility did not ensure that such declines only occurred when medically necessary.
Three residents did not receive appropriate pain management, including lack of pain monitoring, failure to schedule pain management appointments, and improper administration of PRN pain medications without following pain scale parameters or attempting non-pharmacological interventions. Pain medications were sometimes given when pain was not present, and documentation was incomplete or missing.
Two residents did not have complete or accurate documentation in their medical records. One received a one-time dose of Narcan that was not recorded on the MAR, and another had a therapeutic boot recommended by an orthopedist, but its use was not documented on the Treatment Administration Record. These actions resulted in incomplete medical records, contrary to professional standards.
A GNA began caring for residents before completing mandatory training in abuse prevention, dementia care, and infection control, with required education not finished until nearly two months after hire. The NHA confirmed that essential training should have been completed during orientation, but the staff member worked with residents prior to receiving this education.
Baseline Care Plan Omitted Resident’s Anticoagulant Therapy
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident’s baseline care plan reflected the resident’s current medications at the time of admission. The resident was admitted with diagnoses including ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), congestive heart failure, atrial fibrillation, chronic embolism and thrombosis of deep veins, and hypertensive heart disease with heart failure. The hospital discharge summary documented that the resident’s anticoagulant therapy had been changed from Eliquis to Xarelto, with a loading dose of Xarelto 15 mg twice daily starting on 12/7/2025 and a planned transition to Xarelto 20 mg daily on 12/29/2025. Upon admission, the physician orders at the facility included Xarelto as an anticoagulant medication. Record review showed that the resident’s baseline care plan, dated 12/10/2025, did not list anticoagulant medication among the resident’s current medications and did not include any care plan addressing anticoagulant therapy. During an interview, the DON confirmed that the resident was taking Xarelto at the time of admission and acknowledged that the anticoagulant medication should have been included in the baseline care plan. This omission occurred despite the requirement that the baseline care plan, provided within 48 hours of admission, detail the components of care the facility intends to provide, including current medications.
Failure to Develop Comprehensive Care Plan for Resident With Stage IV Pressure Ulcers
Penalty
Summary
Facility staff failed to develop a comprehensive, person-centered care plan for a resident admitted with extensive Stage IV pressure ulcers. The resident was admitted with paraplegia due to a motor vehicle accident, Stage IV pressure ulcers to the left buttock, sacral region, and left ankle, a local infection of the skin and subcutaneous tissue, and unspecified severe protein-calorie malnutrition. A pressure ulcer care plan was created and initiated with a goal that the resident would be free from signs of infection and that the ulcers would improve by the next review date. The listed interventions included carefully drying between toes without applying lotion between them, positioning the resident off affected areas, changing position every two hours and as needed, and a general directive for wound/dressing care "as order" with instructions to observe and change dressings and record observations at a frequency to be specified. The care plan was not comprehensive or resident-centered for the type and severity of the resident’s pressure ulcers. It did not specify the types of wound dressings or the frequency of dressing changes and observations. The plan omitted interventions to prevent further worsening of heel ulcers, such as elevating the heels or using heel boots. It also failed to include any information about the ordered wound vac, including monitoring for an intact seal, assessing for infection, bleeding, or fluid leakage. Additionally, the care plan did not address the type of mattress the resident should use. During review of the pressure ulcer care plan with the DON, the DON acknowledged that the care plan was not comprehensive for the resident’s pressure wounds present on admission.
Failure to Continue Prescribed Post-Hospital Antibiotic Therapy
Penalty
Summary
Facility staff failed to provide ordered treatment and care by not administering a prescribed antibiotic following a resident’s hospital discharge. The resident was admitted with hemiplegia and hemiparesis after a cerebral infarction affecting the left dominant side and had been diagnosed with a urinary tract infection in the hospital, for which Amoxicillin 500 mg three times daily was initiated. The hospital discharge summary specified that this Amoxicillin regimen was to be continued for an additional five days after discharge. Review of the resident’s January 2026 MAR showed no evidence that the Amoxicillin was administered upon admission. During interviews, the DON acknowledged reviewing the discharge summary and initially believing the antibiotic had been given in the hospital, and another staff member stated that the facility’s process includes a second-day chart check for new admissions and believed the antibiotic order was missed.
Concurrent Administration of Eliquis and Xarelto Due to Medication Order Errors
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure a resident remained free from significant medication errors when both Eliquis and Xarelto were ordered and administered contrary to the hospital discharge instructions. The resident was admitted with diagnoses including STEMI, congestive heart failure, atrial fibrillation, chronic embolism and thrombosis of deep veins, and hypertensive heart disease with heart failure. The hospital discharge summary documented that Eliquis had been changed to Xarelto, with a loading dose of Xarelto 15 mg twice daily starting on 12/7/2025 and a planned transition to Xarelto 20 mg daily on 12/29/2025. Upon admission, Xarelto was ordered as directed; however, multiple Eliquis orders were subsequently entered and then discontinued on 12/10/2025, 12/11/2025, and 12/15/2025. The DON stated that the Eliquis order was stopped and restarted to change the indication from DVT to atrial fibrillation. The LPN supervisor reported that the Eliquis orders were created by the pharmacy and verified with the provider, but he could not explain why they were created. The Unit Manager RN acknowledged that the resident was supposed to be on Xarelto per the hospital discharge orders and identified the Eliquis orders as errors on multiple dates, contacting the provider to verify the correct Xarelto order and discontinuing Eliquis each time. Despite these discontinuations, Eliquis continued to appear on the MAR. Review of the December 2025 MAR showed that on 12/16/2025 at the 9:00 AM medication pass, the resident received Eliquis 5 mg along with Xarelto 15 mg, resulting in the administration of both anticoagulants. LPN #18 confirmed administering both medications as documented. The DON later confirmed, upon review of the MAR, that the resident received both Xarelto and Eliquis during that medication administration, and that the resident should have remained on Xarelto per the hospital discharge orders. The administration of both anticoagulant medications increased the resident's risk for bleeding.
Incomplete and Inaccurate Medical Record Documentation for Two Residents
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to maintain complete and accurate medical records in accordance with accepted professional standards for two residents. For one resident with paraplegia, multiple stage 4 pressure ulcers, local skin infection, and severe protein-calorie malnutrition, the medical record initially contained only a few wound notes despite weekly wound care visits. The wound care NP reported that the facility changed electronic systems and that prior wound notes had not transferred into the EMR; the DON later produced printed wound notes that had not been in the record. For the same resident, a change-in-condition note documented hypotension and critical labs with normal respiratory rate and oxygen saturation and no mention of breathing problems, while hospital records from the same day documented shortness of breath and use of a non-rebreather mask at 15 L/min. The RN who sent the resident out stated the resident was having respiratory issues and acknowledged he failed to document this. Additional documentation gaps for this resident included incomplete GNA task records for colostomy output, despite an order to monitor bowel movements every shift. Several shifts in December, January, and February lacked documentation of bowel movements, and the DON stated that if tasks were not signed off, they were not done. A complaint alleged the resident could not keep food down; although there was a PRN order for ondansetron for nausea and vomiting and staff and the physician both recalled an episode of vomiting, there was no nursing documentation of nausea or vomiting in the medical record. Another complaint alleged the facility failed to hold mandated care plan meetings; while there was a letter inviting the family to a care plan meeting on a specific date, there was no documentation in the medical record that the meeting occurred, and the regional social worker confirmed there were no social work notes and that the meeting should have been documented in the assessment section. For a second resident admitted in October 2025, the medical record did not contain documentation that a care plan meeting was held after admission. The EMR’s miscellaneous section contained only a care plan invitation letter for a meeting scheduled in January 2026, with nothing documented for the months immediately following admission. The regional social worker confirmed there was no documentation related to a post-admission care plan meeting for this resident and that only the January meeting notes could be found. These omissions collectively demonstrate that the facility did not maintain complete, accurate, and properly filed medical record documentation for assessments, treatments, changes in condition, and care plan meetings for the residents reviewed.
Failure to Maintain Effective Pest Control Program
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program, as evidenced by multiple documented sightings of roaches, mice, ants, spiders, water bugs, flies, and gnats in various patient care areas, medication rooms, break rooms, laundry, conference rooms, and shower rooms. The pest problem logs reviewed by the surveyor showed repeated entries of pest infestations over several months, including in resident rooms and critical care areas. These logs indicated that the issue was ongoing and widespread throughout the facility. During interviews, the Nursing Home Administrator acknowledged the presence of roaches and rodents in the facility, attributing the problem to the building's age and its location near woods and water. Despite the facility having a pest management company, the logs and staff interviews confirmed that pest sightings continued to occur, and a complaint had been filed regarding the infestation. The surveyor verified and confirmed the presence of pests during the investigation, establishing that the facility's pest control measures were not effective in preventing or addressing infestations.
Failure to Timely Report Alleged Abuse, Neglect, and Theft
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure timely reporting of alleged abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment of residents to the appropriate authorities, as required. Multiple residents reported incidents of staff being rough, making hurtful statements, refusing care, and other forms of mistreatment. In several cases, residents reported these concerns to staff or surveyors, but there was no documented evidence that the facility initiated timely investigations or reported the allegations to the Office of Health Care Quality (OHCQ) within the required timeframes. For example, two residents alleged that a nurse was rough and had a poor attitude, but the concerns were not reported to OHCQ, and there was no documentation of a timely investigation. Another resident reported that a GNA made derogatory comments about their weight and delayed providing care, but these incidents were not reported as abuse or neglect to OHCQ, and the actions taken were only documented as customer service issues. Additionally, the facility failed to report an incident of alleged theft in a timely manner. A resident's cellphone went missing, and although staff were notified on the day of the incident, the report to OHCQ was not made within the required 24-hour period. In another case, a resident alleged being pushed into bed by a GNA, but the initial self-report to OHCQ was not made within the mandated 2-hour window. Furthermore, a resident reported ongoing issues with a roommate to a GNA, but the allegation was not reported to the state agency, and the facility only addressed the issue internally by arranging a room change. Interviews with facility leadership, including the DON and NHA, revealed a lack of consistent understanding and execution of reporting requirements. In several instances, staff acknowledged that incidents were not reported as abuse or neglect, and documentation was either lacking or delayed. The facility's failure to recognize, document, and report these allegations in a timely manner resulted in noncompliance with regulatory requirements for reporting suspected abuse, neglect, or theft.
Failure to Timely Investigate and Document Abuse Allegations
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to thoroughly investigate and document allegations of abuse in a timely manner for multiple residents. In several instances, residents reported that staff were rough, mean, or made inappropriate comments during care. For example, two residents reported that a nurse was rough and had a poor attitude, but there was no evidence that the facility conducted a timely or thorough investigation after these concerns were reported to a unit manager and later to the Director of Nursing (DON). The only documentation provided was a single statement form, with no further evidence of interviews, assessments, or protective measures taken while the investigation was pending. Another resident reported that a Geriatric Nursing Aide (GNA) made hurtful comments about the resident's weight and was rude during care. Although the incident was documented as a concern, there was no evidence that the facility conducted a thorough investigation, assessed the resident, or interviewed staff and residents in a timely manner. The Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) acknowledged that the incident was not treated as abuse and that the GNA was only verbally instructed not to return to the resident's room. Additional incidents included a resident calling 911 to report being aggressively grabbed by a nurse, with a significant delay in conducting required assessments after the NHA was notified. In another case, a family member reported aggressive care by a GNA, but the resident's assessment was not completed until the following day. The DON confirmed that immediate assessments and investigations were not performed as required in these cases.
Failure to Maintain Safe, Clean, and Homelike Environment
Penalty
Summary
Surveyor observations and resident interviews revealed that the facility failed to maintain a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment for its residents. In two separate rooms, residents reported persistent issues with flies and gnats, which were also directly observed by the surveyor at multiple times during the facility tour. A complaint had previously documented problems with pest control, including ants, fruit flies, gnats, and mice. The Maintenance Director confirmed that routine checks of resident rooms were not performed unless an issue was reported, and that fly traps and spraying were not permitted in resident rooms. The Administrator acknowledged the ongoing pest issue and indicated that pest control services were in place, but could not specify the frequency of visits or provide immediate evidence of effective pest management. Despite some pest control measures, the presence of flies and gnats persisted in resident rooms at the time of the survey. In a separate incident, a complaint and subsequent observation of another resident's room revealed that the room had not been painted in years, with visible old paint where items had been removed from the walls. The bathroom faucet was corroded, plaster on the walls was loose and flaky, a ceiling tile was ajar, and the light above one bed was not functioning due to a missing bulb and pull cord. The resident confirmed the light had not worked for some time. The Nursing Home Administrator agreed that these conditions did not constitute a comfortable, homelike environment.
Staff Misappropriation of Resident Funds
Penalty
Summary
Facility staff failed to protect a resident from misappropriation of property when a Geriatric Nursing Assistant (GNA) used the resident's bank card and account information to access funds for personal benefit. The GNA admitted to withdrawing $100 at the resident's request, but denied making other withdrawals. However, a police investigation revealed 28 transactions over several months, with the GNA's name associated with withdrawals via a cash app. Bank records showed two significant withdrawals to the GNA's cash app prior to his termination. The resident confirmed that the staff member used their bank card and stated there had been no further incidents since the last event. The facility administrator was unaware of the GNA's actions until after the staff member's termination and could not confirm whether the withdrawn funds were given to the resident. The administrator also did not know the reason for the GNA's termination and was unable to provide a clear policy regarding staff obtaining money for residents. Facility policy prohibits misuse or abuse of nursing home funds, dishonesty, theft, and misrepresentation, but the events indicate that these policies were not effectively enforced in this case.
Incomplete Discharge Documentation for Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that discharge documentation for a resident was fully completed. Upon review of the resident's closed medical record, it was found that several sections of the Engage Discharge Planning Tool were left blank, including responsible parties' information, primary physician information, staff and resident or responsible party signatures, and the medication list. Additionally, the section regarding whether a pharmacy printout of the medication regimen was attached was not completed, and no medication list or indication of its status was present in the record. Interviews with facility staff revealed that the discharge paperwork is typically initiated by the social worker and completed by various disciplines, including the physician, nurse, rehab, activities, and dietician. The unit manager stated that medication lists are not routinely printed out, and new prescriptions are provided to residents on paper. The social worker confirmed that all sections of the discharge planning tool should be completed before the resident or responsible party receives the paperwork. The Director of Nursing acknowledged the concern when informed of the incomplete documentation, and no additional documentation related to the resident's discharge was provided.
Failure to Provide and Document Baseline Care Plans Upon Admission
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a baseline care plan (BLCP), including a current list of medications, was provided to residents and/or their representatives and documented in the medical record within 48 hours of admission. For two residents reviewed, there was no evidence in the electronic health record (EHR) that the BLCP was present under the designated section, nor was there documentation that the BLCP had been provided to the resident or their representative. In one case, a resident with severely impaired cognition, as indicated by a BIMS score of 0, had a BLCP signed by the resident instead of the representative, contrary to facility expectations. The Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed that the required documentation and signatures were missing and that the BLCP was not properly scanned into the EHR. In another instance, a resident with dementia and a BIMS score of 2 had a BLCP with missing signatures from both the staff and the resident or representative, and there was no evidence that the BLCP or medication list had been provided. The DON and Regional Director of Clinical Operations (RDCO) verified that the required fields were incomplete and that the documentation process had not been followed as expected. These findings were based on medical record reviews and staff interviews conducted during the recertification survey.
Failure to Prevent Unjustified Decline in ADL Abilities
Penalty
Summary
Residents experienced a decline in their ability to perform activities of daily living (ADLs) without a documented medical reason to justify the loss. The facility failed to ensure that residents maintained their ADL abilities unless a medical condition necessitated the decline, as required by regulations.
Failure to Provide Safe and Appropriate Pain Management
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide safe and appropriate pain management for three residents, as evidenced by lack of pain monitoring, failure to schedule necessary pain management appointments, and improper administration of pain medications. One resident, following hospital discharge, was recommended to follow up with a pain management clinic and spine specialist. Although physician orders and a pain care plan were in place, there was no evidence that pain was monitored or recorded every shift, and the resident did not have a scheduled appointment with the pain specialist until after surveyor intervention. The resident continued to experience pain and was unaware of any scheduled follow-up, indicating a breakdown in communication and care coordination. Another resident was administered PRN pain medication even when their pain level was documented as zero, and there was no evidence that non-pharmacological interventions were attempted prior to medication administration. The physician's order did not include non-pharmacological interventions, and the Medication Administration Record did not reflect their use. The DON confirmed that pain medication should not be given when pain is absent and that non-pharmacological interventions should be implemented, but these standards were not followed. A third resident with chronic pain and opioid dependence had PRN orders for both acetaminophen and oxycodone without specific pain scale parameters. Review of records showed inconsistent pain management, with medications given for pain scores that did not align with best practices (e.g., oxycodone for a pain score of 1). There was also no documentation of non-pharmacological interventions prior to medication administration. Staff interviews confirmed that pain medications should be administered according to pain severity and that non-pharmacological interventions should be attempted and documented, but these practices were not consistently followed.
Incomplete and Inaccurate Medical Record Documentation for Two Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain complete and accurate medical records for two residents, as required by professional standards. In the first instance, a resident who had returned from a leave of absence was administered a one-time dose of Narcan after exhibiting unresponsiveness and excessive drowsiness. Although the administration of Narcan was documented in the nursing progress notes, the Medication Administration Record (MAR) for the month did not include documentation of the Narcan administration. Additionally, there was no documented evidence that the resident’s behavior was being routinely monitored following the event. In the second instance, another resident was admitted with a therapeutic boot and had an orthopedist consultation recommending continued use of the boot for weight bearing as tolerated. However, there was no evidence in the clinical record that nursing staff documented the use of the boot on the Treatment Administration Record, despite the expectation that such recommendations would be followed. These omissions resulted in incomplete and inaccurate medical records for both residents.
Failure to Provide Timely Abuse Education to Newly Hired GNA
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide required abuse education to a geriatric nursing assistant (GNA) upon hire, as evidenced by a review of staff training records and administrative interviews. One GNA, who was later falsely accused of sexual abuse by a resident, was hired and began caring for residents before completing mandatory training in infection control, dementia care, and abuse prevention. The training was not completed until nearly two months after the hire date, despite facility policy requiring such education during orientation. The Nursing Home Administrator confirmed that the staff member worked with residents prior to completing the required training.
What surveyors are citing around you — mapped
All 10 risk areas, ranked with evidence
Repeat citations, what's rising near you, and quality measures — ranked so department heads know exactly where to look first.
Illustrative
What surveyors actually found near you
We read the 1,261 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 7 immediate-jeopardy cases — and tell you exactly what happened, in plain English, matched to your record.
Resident with a documented fall history left unattended on the patio; found on the ground with a hip fracture.
Walk-in cooler logs missing for 12 days; expired supplements in the medication room fridge.
Illustrative
A prioritized, do-first checklist
Every risk area becomes concrete audit steps drawn from real citations at facilities like yours — run them this week, before your window opens.
Illustrative
Risk indicators are statistical estimates from public CMS data — not predictions, findings, or compliance advice.
Nursing homes near Catonsville
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ridgeway Rehab Center | 0.4 mi | — | 28 | 0 |
| Forest Haven Nursing And Rehabilitation Ctr | 0.9 mi | — | 54 | 0 |
| Westgate Hills Rehab & Healthcare Ctr | 1.1 mi | — | 10 | 0 |
| Autumn Lake Healthcare At Catonsville | 1.1 mi | — | 9 | 0 |
| Little Sisters Of The Poor | 1.5 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Frederick Villa Healthcare.
100% money-back within 48 hours.
Trusted data, never guesswork. Every citation, penalty, rating and Plan of Correction on this page is sourced from public CMS records (latest release August 2026) and official state health department websites.