Above average — CMS composite of the measures below.
The next survey window likely opens around October 2026
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of July 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Mountain View Rehabilitation And Healthcare Center during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident with major depressive disorder, bipolar disorder, and difficulty walking was care planned for dependent transfers using a mechanical lift with two staff. However, CNAs transferred the resident from bed to a chair without a lift on separate observations, and staff interviews showed confusion about the resident’s transfer status and whether the lift requirement had been communicated. The MDS coordinator said the care plan had been changed through the IDT, but staff were not consistently aware of the updated transfer intervention.
The facility failed to ensure that dietary staff obtained necessary food handler certifications, affecting 53 residents. Despite local health department requirements, three dietary employees lacked certification. Observations showed uncertified staff preparing meals, and interviews revealed a lack of formal policy enforcement. The Dietary Manager and Registered Dietician acknowledged the oversight, while the Administrator admitted to insufficient oversight and training on safe food handling.
The facility failed to maintain a sanitary environment for food production and trash disposal, affecting 54 residents. Observations revealed overflowing trash cans without lids in the kitchen and dining room. Interviews with dietary aides and the RD confirmed that trash cans should have lids and be emptied before overflowing, but inconsistencies in trash management practices were noted.
A survey revealed that medications in an LTC facility were not properly labeled with residents' names. Unlabeled medications were found in medication carts and refrigerators, including pills and an insulin pen. Interviews with nursing staff indicated lapses in labeling due to various reasons, and the DON and Administrator acknowledged the need for proper labeling and secure storage.
A facility failed to accurately assess a resident's skin condition, as a lesion was documented but not included in MDS assessments. The resident, with Alzheimer's and other conditions, had a history of skin lesions treated with Hibiclens and antibiotics. Despite ongoing treatments, MDS assessments marked skin conditions as not present. Interviews revealed inconsistencies in the assessment process, with staff relying on documentation and lacking a specific MDS policy.
A facility failed to implement a baseline care plan within 48 hours for a resident admitted with end-stage renal failure, COPD, and dysphagia. The admitting RN was unaware of the responsibility to initiate the care plan, and the facility lacked documented training for this task. Interviews revealed process breakdowns, especially during night shifts or when management was on vacation, leading to the deficiency.
A facility failed to implement a comprehensive care plan for two residents. One resident's supplemental oxygen was not administered at the prescribed rate, as staff did not have a protocol for daily checks. Another resident's care plan lacked interventions for repeated refusals of dressing changes for burns, despite documentation of refusals. Staff interviews revealed gaps in protocol adherence and timely updates to care plans.
A resident with COPD and other conditions was not receiving the prescribed oxygen flow rate due to a malfunctioning concentrator and lack of staff training. Observations showed the concentrator set at 2.5 LPM instead of the ordered 4 LPM. Interviews revealed no process to ensure correct oxygen delivery, highlighting a deficiency in respiratory care.
Care Plan Not Followed for Resident Transfers
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to implement changes to the care plan for one resident, who had diagnoses of major depressive disorder, bipolar disorder, and difficulty walking. The resident’s MDS showed dependence with chair/bed-to-chair transfers, and the care plan included a goal for assistance with ADLs and personal care, with an intervention added on 05/01/2025 stating the resident was dependent and required maximal non-weight-bearing assistance of two staff using a mechanical lift for transfers. The resident’s Kardex also listed handling and movement for transfers as dependent/maximal/non-weight-bearing assistance for two staff using a mechanical lift. During observations, two CNAs transferred the resident from bed to a rock and go chair without a mechanical lift being present in the room. This occurred on two separate occasions, and the resident was observed in the chair after the transfers. In interviews, one CNA stated the resident’s transfers required a mechanical lift, while another CNA stated she and a coworker completed a two-person assist without using a lift and that she was not aware the resident was care planned for a mechanical lift. A third CNA later stated she had been mistaken about whether the resident could be transferred with or without the lift. The MDS coordinator stated the care plan change for transfers to use a mechanical lift had been made during an IDT meeting and that staff should have been informed through the facility’s text messaging app and/or the communication board. RN staff stated the resident required a lift due to decline and that the care plan should be updated when care needs changed. The DON and Administrator stated staff should follow the plan of care and be informed of changes, but the Administrator also stated there were no set audits in place for monitoring care plans, only random spot checks.
Failure to Ensure Food Handler Certification Among Dietary Staff
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide necessary education to food handlers regarding safe food handling practices, affecting 53 residents who received meals from the kitchen. The local health department's inspection report highlighted issues such as unclean kitchen floors, equipment needing cleaning, and overhead lights requiring repair. Additionally, the local health department's website mandated an annual Food Handler Training Course for all food service employees, with new hires required to complete the training before starting work. However, a review of the facility's dietary staff records revealed that three out of nine employees, including two dietary aides and a cook, lacked a Food Handlers Card or documentation of ServSafe or Clinical Dietary Manager training. Observations and interviews revealed that the dietary staff members without proper certification were actively working in the kitchen, preparing and serving meals. The Dietary Manager acknowledged the process failure, stating that dietary workers had 30 days to obtain their Food Handlers Card, although there was no formal policy enforcing this requirement. The Registered Dietician expressed the expectation that all dietary workers should have certification and that someone with the necessary credentials should always be present in the kitchen. Despite these expectations, the Administrator admitted to a lack of oversight and stated that dietary staff were trained on safe food handling and hygiene while on the job, but did not enforce the certification requirement within the first 30 days of employment.
Sanitation Deficiency in Kitchen and Dining Areas
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain a safe and sanitary environment for food production and trash disposal, affecting 54 residents who received meals from the kitchen. The facility's policies required kitchen garbage cans to have plastic liners, be changed as needed, and be disposed of frequently in the outside dumpster. However, observations revealed a garbage can without a lid, overflowing with trash, in the kitchen area during lunch tray line setup. Additionally, a trash can in the dining room was observed without a lid. Interviews with dietary aides and the registered dietician confirmed that trash cans in the kitchen and dining room should have lids and be emptied before overflowing. Despite the facility's policies and expectations, staff interviews revealed inconsistencies in trash management practices. Dietary Aide 2 stated that trash cans in the kitchen were always to be covered with a lid and emptied before overflowing, yet acknowledged that the large trash can in the dining room had no lid. Dietary Aide 3 admitted that trash cans in the kitchen were sometimes overfilled, preventing lids from being placed on them. The facility's registered dietician and administrator both emphasized the importance of keeping garbage cans covered with lids when not in use. These observations and interviews indicate a failure to adhere to established sanitary guidelines for trash management in the facility's kitchen and dining areas.
Medication Labeling Deficiency in LTC Facility
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that drugs and biologicals were properly labeled with residents' names, as observed during a survey. On multiple occasions, medication carts and refrigerators were found to contain unlabeled medications. Specifically, a medication cart contained a medication cup with an unpackaged white pill labeled only with a resident's name, while another cart had a similar pill without any label. Additionally, a bottle of copper supplement was found without a resident's name, and an insulin pen was labeled only with the opened date, lacking the resident's name. Interviews with nursing staff revealed that medications were sometimes left unlabeled due to various reasons, such as the inability to locate a resident or because the medication was sourced outside the facility's pharmacy service. The Director of Nursing and the Facility Administrator acknowledged the expectation for medications to be labeled and stored securely, and for any medication not administered immediately to be discarded. However, there was a lack of clarity and adherence to these procedures, leading to the observed deficiencies.
Inaccurate Assessment of Resident's Skin Condition
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure accurate assessments for a resident, identified as R25, who had a skin lesion. The lesion was first documented on 10/07/2022, but it was not included in the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments conducted on 10/10/2022, 12/26/2023, and 03/26/2024. Despite the presence of the lesion and ongoing treatments documented in the resident's Treatment Administration Records (TARs) and progress notes, the MDS assessments consistently marked the section for skin conditions as not present. R25 was admitted to the facility with diagnoses including Alzheimer's Disease, peripheral vascular disease, and heart failure. The resident had a history of skin lesions, with treatments documented in the TARs for various periods, including Hibiclens topical treatment and antibiotics for chest abscesses. Observations by a State Survey Agency surveyor on 07/15/2024 confirmed the presence of a lesion on R25's chest, which the resident acknowledged had been there for a long time. Interviews with facility staff, including the MDS nurse and the Regional MDS Consultant, revealed a lack of clarity and consistency in the assessment process. The MDS nurse admitted to not participating in skin assessments until recently and relied on documentation and interviews for MDS assessments. The Regional MDS Consultant stated that the MDS was coded based on available documentation and that the lesion did not meet the criteria for inclusion in the MDS unless it was open at the time. The facility lacked a specific policy for MDS assessments, relying instead on the RAI manual guidelines.
Failure to Implement Baseline Care Plan Within 48 Hours
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop and implement a baseline care plan within 48 hours for a resident, identified as R49, who was admitted with diagnoses including end-stage renal failure, COPD, and dysphagia. The facility's policy required the admitting RN to initiate a baseline care plan immediately upon admission, which should include instructions for effective and resident-centered care, initial goals, physician orders, and services to be administered within the first 48 hours. However, there was no documented evidence of a baseline care plan for R49, and the first documentation in the care plan was noted several days after admission. Interviews with facility staff revealed a lack of awareness and training regarding the responsibility for initiating baseline care plans. RN 7, responsible for R49's admission, was unaware of her responsibility to initiate the care plan. The Staff Development Coordinator admitted that the facility did not document skills check-offs for nurses on orientation related to care plans. The Quality Improvement Nurse and MDS Nurse both acknowledged the process for reviewing and assisting with baseline care plans but noted that admissions occurring during night shifts or when management was on vacation, as in R49's case, led to process breakdowns. The Director of Nursing and the Administrator both expressed expectations for timely care plan initiation but were unsure how the process failed for R49.
Deficiencies in Care Planning for Oxygen Administration and Wound Care Refusals
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for two residents, R10 and R39, as identified in the comprehensive assessment. For R10, the facility did not implement the care plan related to respiratory care, specifically ensuring the resident's supplemental oxygen was administered at the prescribed rate of 4 liters per minute (LPM). Observations on multiple occasions revealed the oxygen concentrator was set to 2.5 LPM, contrary to the physician's order. Interviews with staff, including a State Registered Nurse Aide (SRNA), a Registered Nurse (RN), the Director of Nursing (DON), and the Administrator, indicated a lack of protocol for checking the oxygen flow rate daily, which contributed to the oversight. For R39, the facility failed to update the care plan to include resident-centered interventions regarding the resident's repeated refusals of dressing changes for third-degree burns. Despite the resident's cognitive intactness and understanding of the risks associated with refusal, the care plan did not reflect these behaviors. Interviews with various staff members, including a Treatment RN, the MDS nurse, and the Quality Improvement (QI) RN, highlighted the expectation for care plans to be updated promptly with any changes in resident behavior or condition. However, the care plan for R39 did not include the refusals, which were documented in the Treatment Administration Record (TAR) and nursing notes. The deficiency in care planning for both residents was evident in the lack of adherence to physician orders and the absence of timely updates to care plans. The facility's policy required a multidisciplinary approach to care planning based on comprehensive assessments, but the implementation was inadequate. The interviews with staff and administration revealed a gap in communication and protocol adherence, leading to the deficiencies observed during the survey.
Failure to Administer Correct Oxygen Flow Rate
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide respiratory care consistent with professional standards for a resident with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), obesity with hypovolemia, and cerebral palsy. The resident was admitted with a physician's order for supplemental oxygen at 4 liters per minute (LPM). However, observations on two separate occasions revealed the resident's oxygen concentrator was set at 2.5 LPM, not the prescribed 4 LPM. A registered nurse (RN) at the resident's bedside confirmed the incorrect setting and initially left the room without adjusting the flow meter. Upon further investigation, the RN discovered the oxygen concentrator was malfunctioning and replaced it with a new machine set to the correct flow rate. Interviews with the RN, Advanced Practice Registered Nurse (APRN), Director of Nursing (DON), and the Administrator revealed a lack of training and processes to ensure the correct oxygen flow rate was maintained. The RN admitted to not knowing the resident's oxygen orders and stated that nurses were not trained to check the oxygen flow rate daily. The DON and Administrator acknowledged the absence of an auditing process to verify the oxygen was administered at the prescribed rate, which could lead to residents experiencing shortness of breath if not on the correct flow rate.
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 28 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 Pineville
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Middlesboro Nursing And Rehabilitation Facility | 10.1 mi | ★★★★★ | 1 | 0 |
| Tri State Health And Rehabilitation Center | 12.3 mi | ★★★★★ | 8 | 0 |
| Barbourville Health And Rehabilitation Center | 13.3 mi | ★★★★★ | 7 | 0 |
| Harlan Health And Rehabilitation Center | 21.7 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Claiborne Health And Rehabilitation Center | 21.7 mi | ★★★★★ | 10 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Mountain View Rehabilitation And Healthcare Center.
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 July 2026) and official state health department websites.