Above average — CMS composite of the measures below.
The next survey window likely opens around May 2027
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of October 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Oakview Health And Rehabilitation during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident with diabetes, bipolar disorder, chronic pain, CHF, and bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome declined from needing minimal help to requiring extensive assistance with ADLs, transfers, ambulation, toileting, dressing, and eating. Notes, therapy input, PAR review, observation, and staff interviews all documented the decline, but the facility did not complete a significant change MDS assessment as required after the resident’s status changed.
A resident with Parkinson's disease and dementia was found with unsecured snuff in their room, contrary to facility policy. The policy required tobacco products to be stored at the nurse's station, but did not specify lock box storage. Staff interviews revealed inconsistencies in policy implementation, with some unaware of the need for secure storage. The Director of Nursing acknowledged potential risks, including infection and accidental ingestion.
A resident with chronic heart failure and COPD was on oxygen therapy without a physician's order, contrary to facility policy. Observations showed the resident's oxygen level was set incorrectly, and staff interviews confirmed the oversight. The deficiency was due to a lapse in transferring orders upon the resident's admission.
A facility failed to document a written agreement with a dialysis center providing services to a resident with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). The resident received dialysis three times a week, as per her care plan and physician's orders. Interviews with staff confirmed the absence of a contract, and a request for the contract was made to the dialysis center's legal department.
Failure to Complete Significant Change MDS Assessment After Resident Decline
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to complete a significant change MDS assessment after a resident experienced a decline in status. Facility policy titled MDS Compliance stated that a Significant Change in Status MDS Assessment is to be completed within 14 days after a determination that a resident’s status has significantly changed, and the RAI Manual defined a significant change as a major decline or improvement that impacts more than one area of health status and requires interdisciplinary review and/or care plan revision. The resident was admitted with diagnoses including type 2 diabetes mellitus, bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome, chronic pain syndrome, bipolar disorder, and chronic diastolic congestive heart failure. The admission MDS documented a BIMS of 15 and functional status showing use of a walker and wheelchair, set-up assistance with eating and oral hygiene, set-up/clean-up assistance with toileting hygiene and personal hygiene, and supervision/touching assistance with transfers and walking 50 feet. A later quarterly MDS documented the same BIMS score but showed decline in function, including partial/moderate assistance with toileting hygiene and personal hygiene and substantial/maximal assistance with dressing, transfers, and walking 50 feet. Nurse notes documented complaints of pain in the upper arms and difficulty using the hands, with therapy noting difficulty grasping utensils and neuropathy. A PAR review documented the resident voicing decline in ADLs and needing more assistance. Observation showed the resident being fed by staff in the dining room with hands in her lap. Staff interviews confirmed the resident had declined from being independent to needing assistance with eating, toileting, dressing, ambulation, and transfers, and that the decline had been reported and discussed in PAR meetings. The MDS staff stated they were aware of the decline and had discussed it, but a significant change assessment was not completed.
Failure to Secure Tobacco Products Poses Risk to Resident Safety
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain snuff in a secure location for a resident, identified as R40, which posed a potential risk for avoidable accidents and injuries. The facility's policy on snuff and chewing tobacco use, dated 12/29/2023, indicated that non-smoking tobacco products should be stored at the nurse's station and provided to residents upon request. However, the policy did not specify that these products needed to be stored in a lock box. During an observation, a can of snuff was found on R40's bedside table, contrary to the facility's policy. Interviews with staff revealed inconsistencies in the understanding and implementation of the policy, with some staff unaware of the requirement to store tobacco products securely. R40, who has diagnoses including Parkinson's disease and dementia, was observed using snuff in his room, which was not in line with the facility's guidelines. The care plan for R40 included a focus on cognitive impairment and tobacco use, with interventions to observe changes in the resident's capabilities. Despite this, the snuff was not stored securely, and staff interviews highlighted a lack of clarity regarding the assessment of residents' ability to have tobacco products in their rooms. The Director of Nursing and other staff acknowledged the potential negative outcomes of not securing tobacco products, such as infection risk and accidental ingestion by residents or visitors.
Failure to Obtain Physician Orders and Maintain Appropriate Oxygen Levels
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to obtain physician orders for oxygen (O2) therapy and did not maintain appropriate O2 levels for a resident, identified as R62, who was on O2 therapy. The facility's policy required a physician's order for O2, specifying the liter flow, usage frequency, and delivery method. However, a review of R62's electronic health record revealed no physician orders for O2, despite the resident having diagnoses such as chronic diastolic heart failure and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Observations showed R62's O2 level was set at 3.5 liters per minute (LPM), contrary to the resident's statement that it should be 2 LPM. Interviews with staff, including a registered nurse and the Director of Nursing, confirmed the necessity of physician orders for O2 and acknowledged the oversight. Further investigation revealed that the physician order for R62's O2 therapy was only obtained after the deficiency was identified, with the order being signed by the facility's RN and the physician on subsequent days. Despite the new order, an observation showed R62 receiving 1.5 LPM, less than the prescribed 2 LPM. Interviews with nursing staff confirmed the responsibility to ensure residents receive the correct O2 levels as per physician orders. The deficiency was attributed to a lapse in transferring orders when R62 was admitted to the facility with existing O2 therapy, leading to the resident not receiving the prescribed O2 levels.
Lack of Contract for Dialysis Services
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide documentation of a written agreement or contract with the company providing hemodialysis services for a resident, identified as R84, who was receiving dialysis services. R84 was admitted to the facility with a diagnosis of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and had been receiving dialysis at a specified dialysis clinic per her request. The resident's care plan indicated that she received dialysis on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, and the physician's orders confirmed this schedule. However, upon review of the facility documents, there was no documentation of a written agreement or contract with the dialysis center providing these services. Interviews with facility staff, including the Restorative Nurse and the Administrator, confirmed that R84 had been receiving dialysis services at the specified dialysis center. They revealed that an email was sent to the dialysis center's office requesting a copy of the contract to be sent to the facility. A phone interview with the Area Operations Director further confirmed that the request for a contract was made on the same day as the interviews, and the information was submitted to the dialysis center's legal department for a decision on the effective start date of the contract.
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 45 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 1 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 Summerville
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pruitthealth - Shepherd Hills | 14.8 mi | ★★★★★ | 8 | 0 |
| Pruitthealth - Rome | 16.2 mi | ★★★★★ | 7 | 0 |
| Magnolia Place Nursing And Rehabilitation | 16.2 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Harborview Rome | 16.2 mi | ★★★★★ | 4 | 0 |
| Pruitthealth - Lafayette | 16.5 mi | ★★★★★ | 3 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Oakview Health And Rehabilitation.
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 October 2026) and official state health department websites.