← Back to search results

Legal Business Name Not Available

COLLEGE PARK, GA · Fulton County · For profit - Limited Liability company · 100 certified beds

📍 1765 Temple Avenue, College Park, GA 30337  ·  📞 (404) 767-8609

Medicare ID: 115579  ·  Last Medicare inspection: Aug 12, 2024

Overall Safety Score
51
out of 100
Concerning
Component Scores
40
Inspection
20
Staffing
✓ Clean
Enforcement
55
Complaints
50
Quality
📋 Last inspected: August 12, 2024 📦 CMS data as of: May 2026

Score Breakdown

Inspection
40
Staffing
20
Enforcement
100
Complaints
55
Quality Outcomes
50

What the numbers mean

Legal Business Name Not Available scored 51 out of 100 — 11 points below the state average of 62.

📋 Inspections: 10 citations over the last 36 months — 2 fewer than the state average (12). None were rated as causing actual harm to residents.

🚨 Staffing: Staffing levels are well below average — this is a serious concern. Understaffing leads to worse resident outcomes. We strongly recommend asking for staffing schedules and speaking with current residents or family members before making any decision.

⚖️ Penalties & enforcement: No significant federal fines or enforcement actions on record — a positive indicator of consistent regulatory compliance.

⚠️ Complaints: Above-average complaint activity. Complaint surveys are unannounced and targeted — they often surface problems that routine annual inspections miss. Ask management about the nature of complaints filed and how each was resolved.

⚠️ Resident quality outcomes: Some quality measures are below national benchmarks. Areas like fall prevention, pain management, or medication use may warrant closer attention.

What inspectors found (last 3 surveys)

10
Total citations
State avg: 12
0
Serious (G+)
State avg: 0.9
0
Repeat findings

Top concern areas

10

⚖ Penalties & Enforcement

Federal civil monetary penalties (CMPs) are only issued after a facility has failed two levels of regulatory review — meaning problems were found on inspection and the facility could not rebut the findings. This is a serious escalation beyond a standard citation.

No federal penalties on record. CMS has not issued civil monetary penalties or payment denials against this facility in the current reporting period.
📋 Enforcement Context Analysis
Clean enforcement record — No significant federal enforcement actions or fines on record for this facility. This is a positive indicator.
✅ No enforcement actions on record. This facility's enforcement score of 100/100 reflects a clean enforcement history in the current CMS reporting cycle.

📅 Per-action enforcement records (date, fine amount, and penalty type for each individual action) are sourced from a separate CMS enforcement dataset and will be added in a future data update.

Track this facility with free email alerts

Get notified when new inspections, citations, score changes, or enforcement actions are published for this facility.

⚠️
Overall Assessment — Serious Concerns  ·  51/100
This facility has notable issues in the federal inspection record that require careful evaluation.
What to do next: Do not choose without thoroughly reviewing all citations below and getting answers in writing from management.

What this facility's data shows

📋 Inspections
Inspection record is well below average. Multiple or serious deficiencies found.
👥 Staffing
Staffing is below recommended levels. Ask about RN coverage on nights and weekends.
⚖ Penalties
No significant federal enforcement actions or fines in the record.
💬 Complaints
Higher-than-average complaint volume. Complaint surveys are often triggered by serious resident concerns.
Multiple quality measures are below national benchmarks. Ask management directly about resident care practices.
Score breakdown — the numbers behind this assessment
👥 Staffing 20
What it measures RN hours per resident per day, total nurse hours, and RN turnover rate.
💡 Understaffing is the strongest single predictor of poor inspection outcomes.
📋 Inspection 40
What it measures Number, severity (A–L), and scope of deficiencies found. Repeat findings carry extra weight.
💡 Every citation in Section D feeds directly into this score.
⚖ Penalties 100
What it measures Whether CMS escalated from a deficiency citation to actual financial or operational sanctions.
💡 A penalty means the facility already failed a second level of regulatory review.
💬 Complaints 55
What it measures Volume of complaint-triggered inspections and the share that were substantiated.
💡 Complaint surveys are unannounced — they often surface issues annual surveys miss.
🎯 Quality outcomes 50
What it measures Resident outcome measures: falls, pressure ulcers, antipsychotic use, weight loss, hospitalizations.
💡 Reflects the lived experience of residents beyond what inspectors observe.

Each pillar scores 0–100 and is combined into the overall score. A strong overall can mask a weak pillar — compare all four and see how they stack against the state average in Section B.

🏗 How This Facility Compares to GA State Averages

Comparing a facility to others in the same state puts its score in context. A facility might have 8 citations and that could be above average in one state and below in another. Green means this facility is doing better than its peers; red means it's falling short.

Metric This facility GA avg vs. State
Overall score
The combined Senior Care Report Card score out of 100.
51 62 ▼ Worse than state avg
Inspection score
How well the facility performs on standard health surveys.
40 54 ▼ Worse than state avg
Staffing score
RN hours, total nurse hours, and staff turnover from CMS payroll data.
20 44 ▼ Worse than state avg
Penalty score
Fines, payment denials, and enforcement actions on file.
100 76 ▲ Better than state avg
Complaint score
Volume of complaint surveys and substantiated complaints.
55 83 ▼ Worse than state avg
Quality score
Resident clinical outcomes vs national benchmarks: falls, antipsychotics, pain, vaccination, hospitalizations.
50 61 ▼ Worse than state avg
Citations (3 yrs)
Total number of deficiencies cited in the last 36 months.
10 12 ▲ Better than state avg
Serious citations
Citations rated severity G or higher (actual harm or immediate jeopardy).
0 0.9 ▲ Better than state avg

📅 Inspection Timeline

State health inspectors visit nursing homes on a regular cycle — typically every 12 to 15 months — and document every deficiency they find. The timeline below shows the date and scale of each inspection visit over the past several years. A pattern of worsening surveys is a red flag even if the most recent visit looks clean.

2024-08-12
10 citations
2023-01-05
4 citations
2020-03-05
4 citations

Bar length proportional to citation count. Red = serious findings (severity G+). Orange = elevated. Green = low.

📄 Full Citation Record

Every time state inspectors visit a nursing home, they write up anything that doesn’t meet federal standards. Each write-up is called a citation.

Each citation shows what the problem was and how serious it was, using a color-coded badge:

Green — No residents harmed Yellow — Risk of harm, no injury Orange — A resident was harmed Red — Life or safety in danger

A Repeat tag means the same problem appeared in a previous inspection — it was not fully corrected the first time. Citations shown cover the last two years.

Survey: 2024-08-12 10 citation(s)
F0881 No harm, could worsen
Infection preventionist qualifications
F0812 No harm, could worsen
Food sanitation & safety
F0760 No harm, could worsen
Medication error — no significant harm
F0658 No harm, could worsen
Services meet professional standards
F0600 No harm, could worsen
Freedom from abuse, neglect & exploitation
F0880 No harm, could worsen
Infection prevention & control
F0645 No harm, could worsen
BHP referral requirements
F0656 No harm, could worsen
Comprehensive care plan
F0761 No harm, could worsen
Medication storage & labeling
F0677 No harm, could worsen
Personal hygiene & grooming assistance

💬 Questions to Ask Before Touring

These questions are generated specifically from this facility's score profile and citation history — not a generic checklist. A facility's willingness to answer them openly, and the quality of their answers, is itself an important signal. Bring this list when you tour or call.

  1. Federal inspectors found 0 citations rated as causing actual harm or immediate jeopardy in the public record. Walk us through each incident: what happened, who was affected, and what specific policy or staffing changes have been put in place since?
  2. CMS data shows this facility is significantly below the state average for total nurse hours and RN-specific hours per resident day. What is the actual RN coverage on evenings, nights, and weekends — not the regulatory minimum, but what residents consistently receive?
  3. What is your 90-day CNA and nurse turnover rate? How do you ensure a resident sees the same familiar caregivers across a given week?
  4. How do you handle formal complaints from residents or families, and what is your typical time to resolution?
  5. Some resident outcome measures are below average here. What is your current approach to fall prevention, pain management, and quarterly medication review?
  6. Can we speak privately with two or three current residents or their families?

👪 Family Decision Guide

This guide translates this facility's data into practical next steps for families. It is not a recommendation for or against placement — it is a structured framework for the conversations you need to have before making a decision.

✓ Positives to confirm

  • No significant penalty history — a positive indicator of consistent compliance
  • No serious-harm citations (G+) in the public record
  • No pattern of repeat violations detected

⚠ Areas to probe

  • Inspection score is low — ask for the most recent state survey results
  • Staffing concerns — request staffing schedules and ask about agency nurse use
  • Elevated complaint activity — ask how resident concerns are investigated
  • Always speak with at least two current residents or family members independently

📈 Score History

The score is recalculated every time CMS releases updated data (typically monthly). A consistent downward trend is more concerning than a single low score. An improving trend after a period of poor performance may indicate management changes are taking effect. Your subscription will alert you whenever the score changes materially.

2026-05-07
51 — Concerning

🔔 Monthly tracking is now free

We check CMS data monthly. Use the tracking form above and we will email you when new citations appear, scores change, or enforcement actions are added.

📋
Monthly report update
New citation alerts
📈
Score trend tracking
🏠 Verify this data on Medicare.gov
All data in this report comes from the CMS Care Compare database. You can review the official public record directly on Medicare.gov — including the full inspection narrative, star ratings, and any recent enforcement actions.
View on Medicare.gov ↗

This report reflects publicly available CMS data only and is updated monthly. Severity codes and narratives are reproduced directly from the CMS health inspection database. Senior Care Report Card scores are independently computed and are not affiliated with or endorsed by CMS or Medicare.gov.

Data source: CMS Care Compare · Methodology · State Ombudsman

This report uses public CMS nursing home data and simplified scoring to help families ask better questions. It is not a recommendation, ranking, medical opinion, legal opinion, or substitute for an in-person visit. Source data last published by CMS: May 5, 2026.