Not rated by CMS — ratings are suppressed for new or low-volume facilities.
Past the typical resurvey interval — a standard survey could occur at any time
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 Lotus Village Center For Nursing And Rehabilitatio during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident admitted for rehab after an exploratory laparotomy with new colostomy had a hospital discharge order for twice-daily wet-to-dry NS dressings to a 4 cm abdominal wound with seropurulent drainage, but this order was not transcribed onto the physician orders or TAR. The admitting nurse reviewed the discharge summary only for medications, and the DON skimmed the summary and later forgot to recheck for incision care orders, resulting in no wound treatment being set up. Subsequent nurses assessed the incision but did not provide wound care, and the PA later stated that staff should have read the entire discharge summary and contacted him if no incision orders were found.
A resident admitted after abdominal surgery with a new colostomy had no documented assessments of the colostomy or abdominal incision for the entire stay. Multiple RNs and the DON reported that they assessed the colostomy and incision and that new admissions should have shift-by-shift documentation focused on the reason for admission, but each either forgot to chart or could not confirm their assessments when shown the lack of entries. The Regional Nurse Consultant confirmed the absence of any such documentation, and a PA noted he relies on nursing assessments in the medical record for treatment planning, demonstrating that required clinical assessments were not recorded.
A resident with a neurogenic bladder and chronic indwelling urinary catheter did not have their catheter changed as ordered due to a failure to transcribe the physician's order onto the MAR/TAR. Staff interviews confirmed the omission, and the DON acknowledged that the order was not visible to nursing staff, resulting in the catheter not being changed as scheduled.
A resident with multiple chronic conditions experienced a worsening allergic reaction, including a spreading rash and low-grade fever, after starting an antibiotic. A one-time IM dose of methyl prednisolone was ordered but not administered as scheduled, and nursing staff failed to notify the physician of the delay. The medication was not given until five days later, despite the resident's ongoing symptoms and the nurse practitioner's expectation for timely administration or notification.
A resident with a worsening allergic reaction did not receive a prescribed one-time IM methylprednisolone injection for five days due to nursing staff failing to check the backup medication supply, despite the medication being available. The resident experienced severe itching and rash during this period, and the error was only discovered after the NP followed up on the unadministered order.
A resident's MDS assessment was inaccurately coded in the dental section because the remote MDS Coordinator did not request or ensure a dental assessment was completed during the required period. Nursing documentation confirmed that no dental assessment was performed, and facility leadership expected the dental status to be accurately documented.
A resident with multiple chronic conditions was scheduled for dental extractions, but the facility failed to withhold aspirin as ordered by the NP. The order to hold the antiplatelet medication was documented but not transcribed to the MAR, resulting in continued administration of aspirin and a delay in the dental procedure. Communication lapses among staff contributed to the failure to follow the physician's order, and the resident later required antibiotics and eventually received the extractions.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment was found with Sodium Polyacrylate and solidified fruit punch within reach, posing a potential ingestion hazard. The facility staff, including nurse aides and the DON, were unable to determine how the substance entered the facility. Despite monitoring the resident for gastrointestinal symptoms, no adverse effects were observed.
A cognitively impaired resident in a memory care unit managed to remove a windowpane and exit the facility unsupervised after being denied a smoke break. The resident walked to a nearby gas station before being found and returned by law enforcement. The incident revealed lapses in supervision and security, as the resident had no prior history of elopement and was not considered at risk.
A facility failed to notify the medical provider of an alleged sexual abuse incident involving two residents. Despite staff reporting the incident to the Administrator and DON, the medical provider and family were not informed immediately. The NP was only notified days later, delaying potential medical intervention. The Administrator assumed the notification would be handled the next day, resulting in a deficiency.
A resident with cognitive impairments hit another resident in the eye, believing the victim was viewing inappropriate content on a shared computer. The victim, who had aphasia, avoided the aggressor and the computer for over a week. Staff intervened, and the aggressor was placed under supervision. The facility's computer system was designed to prevent access to inappropriate content.
A facility failed to prevent illegal substances from entering, affecting resident safety. A resident, legally blind, mistakenly ingested methamphetamine left in her room by an unknown individual. Another resident tested positive for THC, linked to a shared vape pen. Drug canines detected scents, but no substances were found. A known drug dealer's visit raised security concerns.
A resident with a history of brain damage, dysphagia, hypertension, and gastrostomy experienced severe septic shock, UTI, and necrotic changes to the left testicle, necessitating its removal. The facility did not recognize the urgency of a Nurse Practitioner's order for a urology appointment following an ultrasound indicating decreased vascular flow. The appointment was scheduled for a later date, resulting in delayed care. Additionally, the facility failed to conduct thorough and ongoing nursing assessments and did not notify the NP or MD when the appointment was not scheduled as ordered, leading to an acute change in the resident's condition.
A facility failed to promptly address decreased vascular flow to a resident's left testicle, despite reports of scrotal swelling and tenderness. Initial assessments led to an ultrasound and antibiotics, but delays in scheduling a urology consultation prolonged necessary medical interventions. The resident's condition worsened, resulting in severe septic shock, a urinary tract infection, and necrotic changes, ultimately necessitating the removal of the testicle. Multiple staff members were aware of the issue, but consistent documentation and follow-up were lacking, and scheduling challenges further delayed care.
A facility experienced a communication breakdown when a urology consult could not be scheduled as ordered by the NP for a resident with a history of anoxic brain injury, persistent vegetative state, and neurogenic bladder. An ultrasound indicated decreased vascular flow to the resident's left testicle, prompting the NP to order an urgent urology consult. The Scheduler faced difficulties in securing the appointment and did not notify the NP or MD, leading to a delay. This delay resulted in the resident developing severe sepsis and requiring an emergency left orchiectomy.
The facility's QAA committee failed to maintain procedures and monitor interventions, leading to repeated deficiencies in Notification of Change, Neglect, and Quality of Care. A resident experienced severe sepsis and an emergency orchiectomy due to delayed medical consultations and inadequate nursing assessments.
Failure to Transcribe and Provide Ordered Surgical Wound Care on Admission
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency involves the facility’s failure to transcribe and implement a physician’s order for surgical wound care upon admission, resulting in the absence of ordered treatment for a resident’s abdominal incision. The resident was admitted following an exploratory laparotomy with creation of a colostomy related to diverticulitis with perforation. The hospital discharge summary documented that on the day of discharge the physician opened a 4 cm portion of the wound below the umbilicus due to seropurulent drainage and ordered wet-to-dry dressing changes with normal saline twice daily. Review of the admission physician orders and the Treatment Administration Record for the admission and following day showed no orders for wet-to-dry dressings or any surgical wound care. The resident’s discharge MDS later documented discharge to home/community with return not anticipated. Nurse #1, who admitted the resident, stated she reviewed the hospital discharge summary only for medication orders and did not read the entire summary, resulting in failure to transcribe the wound care order to the TAR. She reported having a very busy day and acknowledged that between herself and the DON, the treatment order should have been entered. The DON confirmed she assisted with the admission, entered medication orders, assessed the incision, and skimmed the discharge summary, recognizing later that she had not seen incision care orders and then forgot to recheck the summary. Nurse #2 and Nurse #3, who cared for the resident on subsequent shifts, recalled the resident and his new colostomy but indicated they would need to review the record to identify any treatment orders; Nurse #3 confirmed she assessed the incision but did not provide treatment. The Physician Assistant stated nurses are expected to read the entire discharge summary for all discharge orders and that, in the absence of incision care orders, the facility should have contacted him for interim orders.
Failure to Document Assessments for New Colostomy and Abdominal Incision
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain a complete and accurate medical record for a resident admitted after an exploratory laparotomy with creation of a new colostomy. From admission to discharge, the resident’s chart contained no documented assessments of the abdominal incision or the new colostomy. Multiple nurses, the DON, and the Regional Nurse Consultant all acknowledged that assessments should be documented every shift for new admissions, particularly related to the reason for admission, yet no such documentation existed for this resident during the entire stay. Nurse #1 reported assessing the resident’s new colostomy and abdominal incision, describing a damp gauze packed in the bottom of the incision with a dry gauze over it, but admitted she did not document her assessment, intending to do so later and then forgetting after the resident was discharged. Nurse #2 stated that assessments should be documented every shift and recalled the resident had a colostomy, but when informed there was no assessment documented, she could not confirm whether she had assessed the colostomy or incision and said she would need to refer to the record. Nurse #3 stated she assessed the colostomy, which was almost full with a good seal, and also assessed the abdominal incision, but when shown there was no documentation, she acknowledged she must have forgotten to chart it. The DON stated she also looked at the resident’s colostomy and incision but did not document her assessment and did not follow up with nurses when she later noted the absence of documentation. The Regional Nurse Consultant confirmed there were no documented assessments of the colostomy or incision, and the Physician Assistant stated he relies on nurses’ assessments in the medical record for treatment planning, underscoring the absence of required documentation.
Failure to Change Indwelling Urinary Catheter as Ordered
Penalty
Summary
A resident with a history of neurogenic bladder and a chronic indwelling urinary catheter was admitted to the facility with physician orders specifying that the catheter should be changed on a particular date. The order for the catheter change was transcribed into the resident's medical record by a nurse, but it was not entered into the Medication Administration Record (MAR) or Treatment Administration Record (TAR). As a result, the scheduled catheter change was not performed as ordered. Interviews with facility staff, including the nurse responsible for the admission and the Director of Nursing (DON), confirmed that the omission occurred because the order was not properly processed to appear on the MAR or TAR. The DON acknowledged that without the order on these records, nursing staff would not be aware of the need to change the catheter. The Nurse Practitioner (NP) and Administrator both stated that their expectation was for the catheter to be changed as ordered, but this did not occur during the resident's stay.
Failure to Notify Physician of Missed Steroid Dose for Allergic Reaction
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to notify the physician when a one-time dose of methyl prednisolone, ordered for the treatment of an allergic reaction, was not administered as prescribed. Nursing staff documented that the medication was on order but did not inform the physician of the delay or request further instructions. The medication, intended to address a worsening rash, increased redness, hives, itching, and a low-grade fever, was not given until five days after it was ordered. The nurse initialed the Medication Administration Record (MAR) and noted the medication was on order, but did not communicate the missed dose to the physician as expected. The resident involved had a history of heart failure, hypertension, and chronic pain, and developed a severe rash after starting an antibiotic. The rash worsened over several days, spreading and causing significant discomfort, including intense itching and skin peeling. Despite the resident's deteriorating condition and the nurse practitioner's expectation for prompt administration or notification if the medication could not be given, the physician was not notified of the delay, resulting in a significant lapse in care.
Failure to Administer Ordered Steroid Injection Resulting in Significant Medication Error
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency occurred when the facility failed to ensure a one-time dose of methylprednisolone (a steroid) intramuscular injection, prescribed for the treatment of an allergic reaction, was administered as ordered. The resident, who had a history of heart failure and chronic pain, developed an itchy, erythematous rash with hives and a low-grade fever after being treated with clindamycin for a gum abscess. The nurse practitioner (NP) discontinued clindamycin and prescribed alternative medications, including oral and topical treatments, but as the rash worsened, the NP ordered a one-time intramuscular injection of methylprednisolone. Despite the order, the injection was not administered for five days. Nurse #1, who was responsible for giving the injection, did not find the medication on the cart and was incorrectly informed by another nurse that it was not available in the backup medication supply. Although the backup supply did contain the medication, Nurse #1 did not access it and instead passed the responsibility to the oncoming nurse, assuming the medication would be administered once delivered by pharmacy. The medication remained unadministered until the NP discovered the omission during a subsequent visit and directed that the injection be given. Interviews with facility staff, including the Director of Pharmacy Operations, confirmed that the medication was available in the backup supply and had not been removed or administered as ordered. The Director of Nursing and Administrator acknowledged that the nurse should have checked the backup supply and administered the medication as ordered. The resident continued to experience significant discomfort, including widespread rash and severe itching, during the delay in administration.
Inaccurate MDS Dental Assessment Due to Lack of Coordination
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to accurately code the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment in the area of dental for one resident. The resident was admitted to the facility and had a significant change MDS assessment completed, which indicated that the dental status was unable to be examined. The MDS Coordinator responsible for this assessment was working remotely at the time and was no longer employed by the company, making them unavailable for follow-up. Interviews with the Administrator and Director of Nursing (DON) revealed that the remote MDS Coordinator did not reach out to nursing staff or the DON to request a dental assessment during the lookback period, and a review of nursing documentation confirmed that no dental assessment was completed at that time. Both the Administrator and DON stated that they expected the dental status to be accurately completed on the MDS assessment.
Failure to Withhold Antiplatelet Medication Prior to Dental Procedure
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to withhold an antiplatelet medication, specifically aspirin, as ordered by the Nurse Practitioner prior to a scheduled dental extraction for a resident with diagnoses including heart failure, hypertension, and chronic pain. The physician's order to hold aspirin for three days before the dental procedure was documented on the dental consent form but was not transcribed to the Medication Administration Record (MAR). As a result, nursing staff continued to administer aspirin to the resident from 11/1/24 through 11/6/24, contrary to the order. This oversight led to the cancellation of the scheduled dental extractions, as the dental provider could not proceed while the resident was still taking aspirin. Interviews with facility staff revealed a breakdown in communication and process regarding the handling and transcription of physician orders related to dental procedures. The DON and Administrator stated that the expected process was for the signed dental form to be given to the Unit Manager and then to the assigned nurse for transcription to the MAR, but this did not occur. The Unit Manager reported not receiving the relevant dental notes or forms. The resident did not report pain at the time of the missed extraction, but later developed a gum abscess requiring antibiotics and eventually underwent extractions after the medication issue was resolved.
Potential Hazard from Sodium Polyacrylate in Resident's Room
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain an environment free from potential hazards when Sodium Polyacrylate, a super-absorbent powder, and a glass of solidified fruit punch were left within reach of a resident with severe cognitive impairment. The resident, who required extensive assistance for daily activities and was on a dysphagia mechanical diet, was found with these items on his bedside table. The presence of these items posed a risk of ingestion, which could lead to gastrointestinal obstruction, as noted by Poison Control. The incident was discovered by a nurse aide who found the bottle of Sodium Polyacrylate and the solidified fruit punch during her shift. She reported the findings to the nurse, who then contacted Poison Control for guidance. Despite the uncertainty of whether the resident ingested the substance, the facility's staff monitored the resident for any signs of gastrointestinal distress as advised by Poison Control. The resident showed no symptoms and was stable throughout the monitoring period. Interviews with various staff members, including the Dietary Manager, Nurse Aides, and the Director of Nursing, revealed that the source of the Sodium Polyacrylate was unknown, and it was not a substance typically used or ordered by the facility. A search of the facility did not uncover any additional Sodium Polyacrylate, and the maintenance and supply staff confirmed that they had not ordered or used the substance. The facility was unable to determine how the Sodium Polyacrylate ended up in the resident's room, highlighting a lapse in ensuring a safe environment for residents.
Resident Elopement Due to Inadequate Supervision
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to adequately supervise a cognitively impaired resident, leading to the resident exiting the locked memory care unit unsupervised. The resident, who had Alzheimer's disease, dementia, and other conditions, was able to remove a windowpane and exit through a window. This incident occurred after the resident requested to go outside to smoke and was told by staff that it would be a while before they could take him out. The resident returned to his room, and staff continued with their duties, unaware of his subsequent actions. The resident managed to exit through a window in an adjoining room, which was 79 inches from the ground, and walked approximately 2/10 mile to a convenience store. The staff discovered the resident missing during routine rounds and initiated a search. The resident was found by a staff member at a nearby gas station and was returned to the facility by law enforcement. The incident highlighted a significant lapse in supervision and security measures, as the resident was able to remove a heavy glass windowpane and leave the facility unnoticed. Interviews with staff and law enforcement revealed that the resident had no prior history of elopement and was not considered at risk for such behavior. The facility's maintenance staff had previously conducted audits to ensure windows could not open more than 7 inches, but the resident was still able to remove the windowpane. The incident raised concerns about the facility's ability to prevent similar occurrences, given the resident's cognitive impairments and the potential for serious harm.
Failure to Notify Medical Provider of Alleged Abuse
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to notify the medical provider of an alleged sexual abuse incident involving Resident #2. On the night of the incident, Nurse Aides reported to Nurse #4 that Resident #1 had confessed to being sexually inappropriate with Resident #2. Nurse #4, who was not directly responsible for either resident, informed Nurse #5, the supervisor, about the allegation. Both nurses then contacted the facility Administrator and Director of Nursing (DON) for further instructions. However, neither the medical provider nor the family of Resident #2 was notified immediately, as the Administrator assumed the notification would be handled the following day. The Nurse Practitioner (NP) was not informed of the alleged abuse until several days later, which delayed any potential medical examination or intervention. Upon learning of the incident, the NP conducted a vaginal examination on Resident #2, which showed no signs of trauma. The DON expected that the medical provider and family would be notified, but this did not occur. The Administrator acknowledged that the notification was not completed as expected, leading to a deficiency in the facility's response to the alleged abuse.
Resident-to-Resident Abuse Incident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to protect a resident's right to be free from abuse when one resident hit another resident in the left eye with a closed fist. This incident occurred after the aggressor believed the victim was looking at inappropriate pictures on a shared facility computer. The victim, who had a red area under his left eye, avoided the aggressor and the use of the shared computer for approximately a week and a half following the incident. The victim, identified as Resident #4, was admitted to the facility with diagnoses including aphasia, which affected his ability to communicate verbally. His care plan emphasized the importance of engaging in meaningful daily routines, including using the computer. Despite being moderately cognitively impaired, Resident #4 was usually able to make himself understood and had no prior behaviors. The aggressor, identified as Resident #7, was admitted with diagnoses including schizophrenia and generalized anxiety. He was also moderately cognitively impaired and exhibited signs of delirium and delusions. On the day of the incident, staff members, including nurses and nurse aides, responded to the altercation. Resident #7 was placed on one-on-one supervision following the event. Interviews with staff and residents revealed that Resident #7 was confused and had difficulty being redirected, while Resident #4 was known to spend significant time on the computer without accessing inappropriate content. The facility's computer system was designed for the elderly population, making it unlikely for inappropriate content to be accessed.
Failure to Prevent Illegal Substances in Facility
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to prevent illegal substances from entering the premises, affecting the safety and supervision of residents. Resident #3, who is legally blind and has a history of methamphetamine use, reported that an unknown individual in a wheelchair entered her room and left a substance on her table, which she mistakenly identified as candy. Upon tasting it, she recognized it as methamphetamine laced with fentanyl. The resident's family member, a Sheriff's Deputy, confirmed the substance's identity after testing it at the police department. Despite the resident's inability to identify the individual, the incident raised concerns about the facility's security measures and supervision protocols. Resident #1, who is cognitively intact, was involved in a separate incident where he tested positive for THC after being transferred to the hospital. During a police investigation, drug canines detected a scent at Resident #1's room, although no illegal substances were found. Resident #1 initially claimed to have received marijuana from another resident but later admitted to sharing a vape pen containing marijuana with his girlfriend, Resident #6. The vape pen was reportedly stolen from a staff member, although the staff member denied owning it. The facility's administrator was informed of these incidents and requested a search of the facility using drug canines. The investigation revealed that a known drug dealer had visited the facility earlier, raising further concerns about the facility's ability to control access and prevent illegal substances from entering. The administrator's efforts to address the situation included interviewing staff and residents, but the incidents highlighted significant lapses in the facility's supervision and security protocols.
Delayed Urology Appointment Leads to Severe Medical Complications
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to protect a resident's right to be free from neglect when they did not identify the seriousness of a left swollen testicle for Resident #1. Despite a Nurse Practitioner's order for a urology appointment due to decreased vascular flow noted in an ultrasound, the facility scheduled the appointment for a later date, leading to a delay in care. Resident #1 experienced a serious adverse outcome with severe septic shock, urinary tract infection, and necrotic changes to the left testicle, ultimately requiring its removal. Immediate Jeopardy was identified when the facility did not recognize the urgency of the situation, resulting in a delay in necessary medical intervention. The deficiency was further highlighted by the failure to complete thorough and ongoing nursing assessments of the testicle and to notify the Nurse Practitioner or Medical Doctor when the urology appointment was not scheduled as ordered. This lack of timely action led to Resident #1's acute change in condition, requiring emergency care and eventual orchiectomy. The deficiency was exacerbated by the facility's failure to promptly address the medical concerns for Resident #1, who had a history of brain damage, dysphagia, hypertension, and gastrostomy upon admission. The delay in scheduling the urology appointment, inadequate assessments, and lack of communication regarding the testicle's condition culminated in a serious medical emergency for Resident #1, underscoring the facility's failure to protect the resident from neglect.
Delayed Urology Consultation and Inadequate Documentation of Vascular Flow Issues
Penalty
Summary
The deficiency identified in the report pertains to the facility's failure to recognize and address the seriousness of decreased vascular flow to Resident #1's left testicle. Despite reports of scrotal swelling and tenderness, thorough and ongoing nursing assessments of the left testicle were not documented. The Nurse Practitioner (NP) ordered an ultrasound and antibiotics upon initial assessment of the swelling, but delays in scheduling a urology consultation prolonged the Resident's access to necessary medical interventions. The Resident's condition deteriorated, leading to a diagnosis of severe septic shock, urinary tract infection, and necrotic changes in the left testicle, ultimately resulting in the removal of the testicle. Multiple staff members, including Nurse Practitioners, Wound Physicians, and Nurse Aides, were aware of the Resident's scrotal swelling but there was a lack of consistent documentation and follow-up on the issue. The facility's Scheduler faced challenges in scheduling a timely urology consultation, leading to significant delays in the Resident receiving appropriate care. Despite concerns raised by the Resident's family member and healthcare providers, the urgency of the situation was not fully recognized or acted upon promptly, contributing to the Resident's worsening condition.
Communication Breakdown in Scheduling Urology Consult Leads to Acute Condition
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to notify the Nurse Practitioner or the Medical Doctor when a Urology Consult was not able to be scheduled per the Nurse Practitioner's order for Resident #1, who had a history of anoxic brain injury, persistent vegetative state, and neurogenic bladder. The Nurse Practitioner ordered a urology consult as soon as possible after an ultrasound showed decreased vascular flow to Resident #1's left testicle on 02/19/24. However, the Scheduler encountered difficulties in scheduling the appointment promptly, leading to a delay in Resident #1 receiving the necessary urology consultation. This delay resulted in Resident #1 experiencing an acute change in condition on 03/11/24, leading to a diagnosis of severe sepsis and necessitating an emergency left orchiectomy. Despite the Nurse Practitioner's order for an urgent urology consult, the Scheduler faced challenges in promptly securing an appointment for Resident #1. The Nurse Practitioner was unaware of these difficulties and assumed the appointment had been made, highlighting a breakdown in communication within the facility. This lack of notification to the medical providers about the scheduling issues prevented timely intervention that could have potentially averted the adverse outcome experienced by Resident #1.
Repeated Failures in Quality Assessment and Assurance
Penalty
Summary
The facility's Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) committee failed to maintain implemented procedures and monitor interventions following previous surveys. This failure resulted in repeat deficiencies in the areas of Notification of Change, Neglect, and Quality of Care. Specifically, the facility did not notify the Nurse Practitioner or Medical Doctor when a Urology Consult could not be scheduled for a resident with decreased vascular flow to the left testicle, leading to severe sepsis and an emergency orchiectomy. Additionally, the facility failed to identify the seriousness of the resident's condition, complete thorough nursing assessments, and schedule timely medical consultations, resulting in delayed care and treatment. The deficiencies were observed in multiple instances, including a failure to notify the Medical Director during an acute change in condition, neglecting to seek medical assistance, and not performing necessary skin assessments and treatments. These repeated failures indicate a pattern of the facility's inability to sustain an effective QAA program. The deficiencies affected the quality of care provided to residents, leading to serious adverse outcomes, including severe septic shock and the need for emergency medical interventions.
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 11 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — 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 Sparta
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grayson Health And Rehabilitation | 8 mi | — | 1 | 0 |
| Waddell Nursing And Rehab Center | 15.2 mi | — | 4 | 0 |
| Galax Health And Rehab | 16.9 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
| Margate Health And Rehabilitation, Llc | 19.2 mi | — | 3 | 0 |
| Chatham Nursing & Rehabilitation | 21.6 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Lotus Village Center For Nursing And Rehabilitatio.
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.