Above average — CMS composite of the measures below.
The next survey window likely opens around November 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 Sterling Care Forest Hill during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
Surveyors observed multiple resident room environmental issues, including holes and patched areas in walls, scraping and missing paint, peeling surfaces, and a sink that appeared to be coming off the wall. A resident also reported that shared bathroom doors would not lock and could open when a wheelchair hit the neighboring door, while another resident said wall scratches were caused by the bed hitting the wall.
Call bell cords were found out of reach for two residents during survey observations. A surveyor saw one call light cord on the floor beside one resident's bed and later observed another call light cord below the roommate's bed. An LPN was shown the cord below the bed and then retrieved it.
A resident with urinary incontinence, a peri-region rash, and a toileting schedule order did not receive timely ADL care. Staff confirmed the resident had not yet been offered toileting or incontinence care during the morning, and observation found wetness, multiple absorbent items under an open brief, and irritated pink skin in the perineal area. The resident reported burning, itching, and long waits for care, while the DON stated incontinence care should occur during GNA rounds and every 2 hours.
A resident with ongoing vaginal discomfort and irritated skin had a physician-ordered GYN consult that was scheduled and then canceled, but the cancellation was not documented in the record. Staff later said they assumed the spouse wanted the appointment canceled because only one person could ride the transport van, while the resident and complainant denied requesting cancellation. The consult was still not completed months later.
Failure to provide ordered 1:1 meal assistance and required fluids: A resident with dysphagia and a physician order for 1:1 assist with meals was observed eating without staff present, while the breakfast tray was missing thickened milk and orange juice listed on the meal ticket. The resident’s care plan included 1:1 meal assistance and monitoring for swallowing difficulty, and RN staff confirmed the resident was eating unassisted with liquids missing from the tray.
Unlabeled oxygen tubing and humidifier bottles were observed for multiple residents receiving O2 therapy. A resident with PRN O2 for SOB, another resident on continuous O2 for SOB, and a third resident on continuous O2 for COPD were found with nasal cannula tubing that was not dated; one resident was also connected to an empty, undated humidifier bottle. Staff confirmed the tubing and humidifier bottle were not labeled with dates.
The facility failed to act on an approved pharmacy recommendation for a resident’s inhaled medication. The pharmacist recommended adding a mouth-rinse instruction to the order for fluticasone-salmeterol, the physician approved it, but the MAR showed the instruction was not carried out. The DON said pharmacy reviews are sent for physician approval and then entered by unit managers, but she could not explain why the approved recommendation was not implemented.
Expired stock medications were found in house stock medication storage, including OTC medications and supplies in cabinets on two halls. Surveyors observed multiple expired items in the medication cabinets, and staff stated that floor stock was supplied by central supply, expiration dates were checked, and there was no expiration log for items.
A resident’s pain medication was inaccurately documented in provider progress notes. The resident was receiving Hydromorphone 2 mg q6h for pain, but the attending NP continued to chart that pain was managed with Morphine Sulfate 15 mg q4h even after the Morphine order had been discontinued. The DON reviewed the notes and confirmed the discrepancy between the current orders and the documentation.
Failure to track and document antibiotic use: A resident received Ceftriaxone for a wound infection without provider notes, lab support, or other clinical evidence in the record to justify the order. Wound culture results showed no active infection, yet the antibiotic was not included on the facility’s antibiotic stewardship line listing even though the DON and IP stated all antibiotics were to be reviewed and tracked.
A resident admitted in September had no documented flu shot, and the EMR still showed pending consent. The IP stated residents and staff are offered the vaccine during flu season and the record should reflect vaccination or refusal. Although family consent was on file, the resident was scheduled for the vaccine and it was not given.
Delayed Documentation of COVID-19 Vaccination Status: A resident's COVID-19 immunization status remained documented as pending consent for more than 50 days after admission. The IP stated staff review vaccination status on admission and offer vaccines to eligible residents, but the EMR still showed the status as pending consent during survey review, and the updated consent had not been documented at that time.
A cognitively impaired resident with a known elopement risk exited a facility unsupervised due to an unsecured kitchen door left open by contractors. Despite having a functional wander guard, the resident was able to leave without triggering an alarm and was found at a nearby gas station. The incident highlighted a lapse in supervision and security measures for residents with exit-seeking behaviors.
The facility failed to store food according to professional standards, as observed during a survey. A bowl of croutons with expired dates was found in the refrigerator, and several items in the walk-in freezer lacked date labels. The dietary aide confirmed these issues and removed the items. These findings were discussed with the administration team.
The facility failed to allow residents on Unit 300 to move freely, as the unit was locked and required a code to enter and exit. The RN Unit Manager stated the unit was locked due to an elopement risk, but not all residents had access to the codes. A GNA was seen giving a resident the code, and some residents who went to the dining room had it, but one resident stated they never received the code, and another confirmed they did not have it.
A resident expressed concern about their vision, stating they needed cataract surgery, but the facility failed to follow up on an ophthalmologist's recommendation. Despite an optometrist's referral for surgery, the appointment was delayed due to miscommunication and incorrect information about insurance issues.
The facility failed to maintain equipment and provide a clean, homelike environment, as observed in two resident rooms. Issues included non-functioning heating and air-conditioning units, a musty odor, a detached bathroom sink, and a large hole in the wall. Despite acknowledgment from maintenance staff, these deficiencies persisted upon follow-up observation.
The facility staff did not complete daily assignment sheets on Unit 300 and failed to retain nursing staff data for 18 months. Missing assignment sheets for specific dates and shifts were discovered during a survey. Interviews with the RN Unit Manager and the Assistant DON confirmed the expectation for daily completion and monthly storage of these sheets.
A facility failed to make necessary repairs in a resident's room, where a large section of the baseboard was detached from the wall, and the bathroom sink had a significant gap needing caulking. The resident noted previous repair attempts and mentioned a hallway flood that caused the wall to shift, leading to further damage.
Resident Rooms Not Maintained in Homelike Condition
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain resident rooms in a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike condition during the initial tour and subsequent survey observations. Surveyors observed multiple environmental issues in five resident rooms, including a hole in the wall with a patched area still visible, scraping and missing paint on walls, peeling behind a bed, and a sink that appeared to be coming off the wall. One bathroom door had a sign stating, "do not use," dated 6/8/25, and the bathroom was shared with another room. Resident #77 stated that the bathroom doors had not been able to lock since admission and reported that when backing a wheelchair into the bathroom, it sometimes hit the neighboring room's door and caused it to open. Resident #120 stated that scratches on the wall were caused by the bed hitting the wall. During the tour with the Administrator and Maintenance Director, the surveyor observed the room conditions and the bathroom issue, and the Administrator and Maintenance Director took notes and photos while discussing the sinks and wall issues.
Call Bell Not Within Reach of Two Residents
Penalty
Summary
Facility staff failed to ensure a call bell was within reach of residents, as observed for 2 of 43 residents reviewed. During the initial tour, a surveyor observed the call light cord on the floor on the left side of Resident #37's bed in room [ROOM NUMBER]. On a later tour of rooms identified for further observation, the surveyor observed a call light cord below the bed of Resident #85, who was the roommate of Resident #37, in room [ROOM NUMBER]. Staff #6 was interviewed after the observation, was shown the call bell cord below Resident #85's bed, and stated she would take care of it before entering the room and retrieving the cord.
Delayed Incontinence Care and Toileting Assistance
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide timely ADL care related to urine incontinence for one resident who was reviewed for ADLs during the recertification survey. The resident reported that when getting up in the morning and being placed in a wheelchair, the skin was raw from urine, it hurt and burned, and incontinence care was sometimes not provided until 3:00 or 4:00 PM. The resident also stated that care was delayed because staff took a long time to respond when the call light was used. Record review showed a physician order for a toileting schedule to offer and provide toileting or a urinal upon arising, before meals, after meals, at bedtime, and as needed. The care plan also directed frequent toileting and incontinence care every shift as tolerated, and identified a peri-region rash related to incontinence. A skin and wound progress note further documented a recommendation that the resident be changed when soiled to prevent breakdown. Despite these directions, the last documented incontinence care noted in the task record was at 2:39 AM, and staff later confirmed the resident had not yet received incontinence care or been offered toileting during the morning. During observation, the resident was found with multiple absorbent materials beneath an open brief, including a folded towel, two underpads, and a folded blanket. Wetness was visible through the brief and towel, and the resident had irritated pink skin in the perineal area. After care was provided, the resident voided and stated that it felt like fire, hurt, and itched, and that the problem had been going on for a year. The DON stated that incontinence care should occur during GNA rounds and every two hours, and acknowledged that using multiple absorbent items underneath a resident posed a risk for skin breakdown. The resident later denied that an 11:00 AM care schedule was their requested choice and stated that waiting 5 to 6 hours was unacceptable.
Failure to Complete Ordered GYN Consultation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure an ordered gynecology consultation for a resident with continuous vaginal discomfort and irritated skin with incontinent episodes was completed. A physician order for a GYN consultation was entered on 9/23/2025, and the resident later reported ongoing irritation, stating the condition had been present for about a year and caused pain with urination. During observation, the resident again stated that staff had said it was a yeast infection that would not go away and that the same treatment kept being used. Record review showed the GYN consultation was discussed at an interdisciplinary meeting and was scheduled for December, with the RN attempting to expedite the appointment. Staff later confirmed the appointment had been scheduled for December 4th or 5th but was canceled, and no documentation of the cancellation was found in the medical record. The resident denied having been seen by a GYN doctor, and the complainant stated they had not requested any cancellation. The facility later produced an appointment request form for a December 4th appointment, but there was no further detail showing that family or transport had been contacted, and staff stated they assumed the spouse wanted the appointment canceled because only one person could accompany the resident on the transport van.
Failure to Provide Ordered 1:1 Meal Assistance and Required Fluids
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to assist a resident with known dysphagia and failed to provide liquids during a meal. Resident #37 was observed in bed with a breakfast tray positioned over the bed while hollering out, and no staff were present. During a later observation, the resident was self-feeding with the head of the bed elevated and leaning to the right side, again with no staff present. The breakfast tray was missing the thickened milk and orange juice listed on the meal ticket. Record review showed a physician order dated 9/24/2025 for 1:1 assist with meals. The resident’s care plans included an ADL self-care deficit related to weakness with an intervention for 1:1 meal assistance, and a dysphagia care plan with interventions to monitor for signs of swallowing difficulty such as choking, coughing, holding food in the mouth, and multiple swallowing attempts. During interview, RN Staff #3 stated that liquid items listed on a resident’s meal ticket should be present on the tray and that residents requiring 1:1 meal assistance should have staff present and assisting. Staff #3 confirmed the resident was eating unassisted and that milk and juice were missing from the breakfast tray. The DON stated that a staff member must be present to provide 1:1 assistance for any resident requiring that level of support.
Unlabeled oxygen tubing and humidifier bottles
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide safe and appropriate respiratory care by not labeling oxygen tubing and humidifier bottles with the date of change for three residents receiving oxygen therapy. During survey observations, Resident #1 and Resident #24 were seen receiving oxygen through unlabeled nasal cannula tubing, and Resident #1 did not have a dated label on the humidifier bottle. Later, Resident #1 and Resident #66 were observed in the dayroom receiving oxygen through unlabeled nasal cannula tubing connected to their oxygen tanks. Record review showed that Resident #1 had an order for oxygen at 2 L/min via nasal cannula as needed for shortness of breath, Resident #24 had an order for oxygen at 2 L/min via nasal cannula continuously for shortness of breath, and Resident #66 had an order for oxygen at 3 L/min via nasal cannula continuously for COPD. Additional observation found Resident #24 connected to an empty humidifier bottle, and both Resident #24 and Resident #1 were using unlabeled nasal cannula tubing. Staff confirmed that the humidifier bottle was empty and not labeled, and that the tubing for Resident #24 and Resident #1 was not dated. Staff also stated that oxygen tubing should be labeled with the date when placed and changed every 7 days, and humidifier bottles should be dated when replaced.
Failure to Carry Out Approved Pharmacy Recommendation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to act upon a pharmacy-identified irregularity for one resident reviewed for unnecessary medications. Review of the pharmacy’s monthly medication reviews from February through November 2025 showed recommendations in February, August, October, and November. In February 2025, the pharmacist recommended adding "Rinse mouth out after use of this medication" to the order for fluticasone-salmeterol inhalation aerosol powder breath activated 100-50 MCG/ACT, and this recommendation was reviewed, signed, and approved by the attending physician. However, review of the MAR from February through November 2025 showed that the recommendation was not carried out as ordered. The DON stated that pharmacy reviews are emailed to her for physician review and approval, and then the orders are given to unit managers to enter into the electronic records, but she was unable to explain how the approved recommendation was not implemented and acknowledged the concern.
Expired stock medications found in medication cabinets
Penalty
Summary
Drugs and biologicals were not properly stored because expired medications and supplies remained in the house stock medication cabinets. During a medication storage observation on 12/19/2025 at 09:10 AM, the surveyor found expired items in the house stock medication cabinet on the 100 Hall, including liquid acetaminophen, Geri-Lanta antacid, zinc tablets, docusate sodium liquid, aspirin tablets, glucagon injection, and a continuous flow solution set. The surveyor also found expired zinc tablets in the house stock medication drawer on the 200 Hall, showing that 2 of 3 stock medication cabinets observed contained expired items. Staff #10 stated that floor stock medications were handled by the central supply technician and that staff were likely retrieving cart replacement medications from the front rather than the back of the cabinet. Staff #10 also stated that nursing staff needed education on stock rotation. Staff #15, the central supply technician, stated that he/she supplied the units with OTC house stock medications and checked expiration dates, but there was no log for item expiration. The expired medications were placed in a container and the unit manager was informed. On 12/22/2025, the DON was informed of the expired medications and acknowledged the concern.
Inaccurate documentation of current pain medication
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that the provider accurately documented a resident’s current medications. Resident #14 reported taking scheduled pain medication every six hours, but the medical record showed that Hydromorphone 2 mg every six hours had been prescribed for pain starting in July 2025. Despite this, the attending NP repeatedly documented in progress notes that the resident’s pain was currently managed on Morphine Sulfate oral tablet 15 mg, 1 tablet by mouth every 4 hours for pain since 4/21/25. Review of the record showed that the Morphine Sulfate order had been discontinued on 6/11/25 and the Hydromorphone order had been started on 7/01/25. The DON reviewed the progress notes and validated that there were discrepancies between the resident’s current orders and the NP’s documentation.
Failure to Track and Document Antibiotic Use
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to monitor and track antibiotic use effectively for one resident reviewed for antibiotic stewardship. Resident #3 had an order for Ceftriaxone 2 g IV twice daily for a wound infection for seven days starting 11/29/25, but the medical record did not contain provider progress notes or laboratory results to support the diagnosis of a wound infection. During the survey, the DON explained that when an antibiotic is needed, the wound must be assessed and the provider must document the specific signs and symptoms before an order is issued, but supporting documentation for this Ceftriaxone order was not present in the record. The surveyor obtained two sacral tissue wound culture reports for the resident from specimens collected on 11/14/25. One report showed growth of several organisms with no further workup, and the later report stated no anaerobic organism isolated and normal enteric flora, also with no further workup. The Infection Preventionist validated that the most recent report confirmed no active infection was present and that there was no provider documentation of wound status or other clinical evidence to justify the antibiotic treatment. The surveyor also found that the Ceftriaxone order was missing from the facility’s Antibiotic Stewardship Line Listing, and the Infection Preventionist confirmed that the antibiotic had been omitted from stewardship tracking even though all antibiotics were supposed to be reviewed weekly and included on the list.
Failure to Administer Offered Influenza Vaccine
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that influenza immunizations were consistently offered or administered during the active flu season. In a review of Resident #124’s record, the resident, who was admitted in September 2025, had no documentation of an influenza vaccination, and the EMR listed the resident’s status as pending consent. During interview, the Infection Preventionist stated that residents and staff are offered the vaccine during flu season and that the EMR should be updated to reflect vaccination or refusal. A signed consent form from the resident’s family was later provided, showing consent had been obtained, but the resident had been scheduled for vaccination and the dose was not administered.
Delayed Documentation of COVID-19 Vaccination Status
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that residents' COVID-19 vaccination statuses were monitored and maintained in a timely manner. During review of immunization records for five randomly selected residents, Resident #129 was found to have been admitted in October 2025, but the resident's COVID-19 immunization status remained documented only as pending consent. During interview, the Infection Preventionist stated that facility staff review residents' vaccination status upon admission and offer vaccines to eligible residents. Review of Resident #129's Immunization Session tab in the electronic medical record confirmed that the COVID-19 vaccination status had remained listed as pending consent for more than 50 days after admission. The Infection Preventionist later stated that the facility had contacted the resident's family and obtained consent, but at the time of the surveyor's review, the updated status had not been documented in the medical record.
Resident Elopement Due to Inadequate Supervision and Unsecured Exit
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide adequate supervision to a cognitively impaired resident with a known risk of elopement and exit-seeking behavior, resulting in the resident leaving the building unsupervised. The incident involved a 72-year-old resident with severe cognitive impairment, as indicated by a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 0, and a history of dementia with behavioral disturbance. The resident was placed on a wander guard due to wandering behavior and a high elopement risk assessment. Despite these precautions, the resident was able to exit the facility through a kitchen door that was left open by a contractor. On the night of the incident, the resident was last seen at the nurses' station and later near a soda machine on the second floor. A Geriatric Nursing Assistant (GNA) attempted to guide the resident back to the unit, but the resident stopped at the nurses' station and began talking to himself. The GNA left the resident to attend to other duties, and shortly after, the resident eloped from the facility. The resident was found approximately 800 feet away at a nearby gas station and was returned to the facility by the night shift RN supervisor. The facility's investigation revealed that the wander guard on the resident's wrist was functional, but the kitchen exit door lacked a wander guard alarm at the time of the incident. The door was left open by contractors cleaning the kitchen hoods, allowing the resident to exit without triggering an alarm. The facility's failure to ensure the kitchen door was secured and monitored contributed to the resident's unsupervised departure.
Removal Plan
- The resident's wander guard bracelet was checked and found functional.
- A thorough physical examination and psychological assessment performed by the registered nurse and the social worker found the resident with physical injuries and was still cognitively impaired with a BIMS of 0.
- All doors were checked in the facility by the RN supervisor and the nurses.
- The ADON was notified.
- The ADON performed an audit of the elopement risk book, elopement assessments, wander guards to ensure placement and function, wander guard orders and elopement care plans to ensure the documents were updated.
- An elopement drill was performed at the facility to ensure all residents were in the facility.
- An assessment of the kitchen door was performed again by the administrator and the maintenance director.
- The plan of correction was initiated, and staff education was initiated regarding the kitchen staff signing off in the evening that the kitchen door is locked.
- A statement signed by the Maintenance Director stated that he educated the vendors on the new policy related to ensuring the kitchen doors remain locked while the vendors are working on kitchen projects. The requirement to have a facility maintenance staff member present during the evening hours when the contracted vendors are present.
- The magnetic lock and the wander guard alarm were installed on the exterior kitchen door.
- Elopement drills to be conducted on 7-3, 3-11, and 11-7 shifts and then quarterly.
Food Storage Deficiency
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to store food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety, as observed during a survey. During an initial tour of the kitchen, a large bowl of croutons was found in the refrigerator with a date-in of 06/13/24 and a date-out of 06/19/24, indicating it should have been removed. The dietary aide staff accompanying the surveyors confirmed this and removed the croutons. Additionally, in the walk-in freezer, several items, including a small bag of sugar cookies, five large bags of pancakes, and three bags of French toast, were found without date labels. The dietary aide staff acknowledged that these items should have been dated and removed them immediately. These observations were discussed with the administration team at the time of exit.
Failure to Allow Free Movement on Locked Unit
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to allow residents on Unit 300 to move freely throughout the facility, as the unit was locked and required a code to enter and exit. This deficiency was identified during a survey when the surveyor entered Unit 300, which is primarily used for residents requiring rehabilitation services. The Registered Nurse (RN) Unit Manager explained that the unit was locked due to a resident being an elopement risk, although the resident was easily redirected. Family members and visitors were provided with the codes at the front desk. During interviews, it was revealed that not all residents had access to the codes. A Geriatric Nursing Assistant (GNA) was observed giving a resident a piece of paper with the code, and it was noted that some residents who went to the dining room had the code. However, one resident stated they had never received the code, and another resident confirmed they did not have the codes to enter and exit the unit.
Failure to Follow Up on Ophthalmologist's Recommendation for Cataract Surgery
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to address and follow up on an ophthalmologist's recommendation for a resident who required cataract surgery. The resident expressed concern about their vision, stating that their last eye appointment was in January and that they were informed they would need surgery. Upon observation, the resident was not wearing glasses, and no glasses were found at their bedside. A review of the resident's medical record revealed an order for an optometrist consult placed in October of the previous year, and the last optometrist appointment in April recommended a referral for cataract surgery. Interviews with staff revealed discrepancies in the scheduling of the necessary ophthalmologist appointment. The Unit Manager, responsible for scheduling specialty appointments, initially cited insurance issues as a barrier to scheduling the appointment. However, the business manager confirmed that there were no insurance issues preventing the appointment. This lack of follow-up and miscommunication resulted in a delay in addressing the resident's vision needs, as the ophthalmologist appointment was only scheduled after the surveyor's inquiry.
Facility Fails to Maintain Equipment and Environment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain equipment in good repair and provide a clean, homelike environment for its residents. During observation rounds, surveyors noted several deficiencies in two resident rooms. In one room, the heating and air-conditioning unit was not functioning, with a wet black substance visible on the grill, and the unit's cover was falling off. A musty odor was present throughout the room. In another room, the bathroom air duct vent had a 1-inch layer of dry gray/white substance, and the bathroom sink was detached from the wall. Additionally, a heating and air-conditioning unit was leaking water onto the floor, and a large hole was observed in the wall adjacent to the unit. Despite the maintenance technician's acknowledgment of these issues and the promise to address them, a follow-up observation revealed that the deficiencies persisted. The heating and air-conditioning unit continued to leak water, the musty odor remained, and the hole in the wall was not repaired. The wet black substance was still present on the heating and air-conditioning grill, and the bathroom air duct vent still had the dry gray/white substance. The unit manager confirmed these ongoing issues and indicated that the maintenance technician would be notified immediately.
Failure to Maintain Daily Assignment Sheets
Penalty
Summary
The facility staff failed to ensure that assignment sheets were completed daily on Unit 300 and did not retain the posted daily nursing staff data for a minimum of 18 months. This deficiency was identified during a survey when the surveyor requested assignment sheets for specific dates and shifts, which were found to be missing. Specifically, the written copies of the schedule for the dates 08/02/24 11pm-7am, 08/03/24 & 08/04/24 all shifts, 08/05/24 11pm-7am, and 08/06/24 11pm-7am were not available. During interviews, the RN Unit Manager and the Assistant Director of Nursing confirmed that staff are expected to complete assignment sheets daily for all shifts and that these sheets are removed from the unit after one month and stored monthly.
Facility Failed to Ensure Timely Repairs in Resident's Room
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure necessary repairs were made in a resident's room, as observed during a survey. Specifically, a large section of the baseboard, approximately 25 feet, was completely detached from the wall at the head of the resident's bed, with broken drywall pieces visible. Additionally, the bathroom sink in the resident's room had a significant gap between the sink and the wall, requiring caulking. The resident reported that some repairs had been attempted, but following a hallway flood, the wall at the head of the bed shifted, causing further damage. The resident also mentioned that personal items were stored in a plastic bag on the floor.
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 834 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 4 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 Forest Hill
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sterling Care Bel Air | 1.8 mi | ★★★★★ | 18 | 0 |
| Lorien Nsg & Rehab Ctr Belair | 4.8 mi | ★★★★★ | 9 | 0 |
| Sterling Care Riverside | 9.4 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Glen Meadows Retirement Com. | 10.8 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Lorien Bulle Rock | 12 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Sterling Care Forest Hill.
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.