Above average — CMS composite of the measures below.
A standard survey is most likely before 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 Fairview Nursing And Rehabilitation Community during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident with CHF and UTI history developed worsening confusion, low back pain, and cloudy urine after a fall, and a UA/C&S was ordered. The UA was positive and the culture later identified an antibiotic option, but staff did not review the lab portal or faxed results until several days later. The IPC said she usually checked results only Tue-Fri and the DON stated staff should have monitored both the portal and fax, especially with a pending UA.
The facility did not establish or maintain an infection prevention and control program as required, resulting in a deficiency identified by surveyors.
A resident with Type 2 diabetes had blood glucose readings above the physician-ordered threshold for notification on two occasions, but there was no documentation that the physician was notified. Nursing staff either did not recall notifying the physician or misunderstood the notification threshold, and the DON confirmed that documentation of such notifications was expected but not present.
A resident with significant cardiac and respiratory diagnoses was transferred from bed to wheelchair by a nurse without the use of a gait belt, despite the care plan and staff interviews confirming that a gait belt was required for all such transfers. The gait belt was available in the room but not used, and staff acknowledged the expectation to use it for all non-independent transfers.
A resident with hemiplegia and incontinence did not consistently receive timely incontinence care with the required two-person assistance, and care was not always documented as required. Staff interviews and records showed long gaps between brief changes and instances where only one staff member assisted, contrary to the care plan and facility policy.
The facility failed to properly label and date food items in the kitchen, including a lemonade pitcher, condiments, bread, and other items, which could lead to foodborne illness. A dietary aide and the Certified Dietary Manager acknowledged the oversight, with plans for staff reeducation.
A resident with multiple health issues was readmitted to a facility and enrolled in hospice care, but the facility failed to complete a Significant Change in Status Assessment (SCSA) within the required 14 days. The MDS Coordinator did not recall an IDT discussion to determine the need for the assessment, leading to potential unassessed needs.
A facility failed to implement enhanced barrier precautions for a resident with chronic respiratory failure and an indwelling urinary catheter. Despite the care plan requiring PPE, a CNA provided care without a gown, citing a lack of training. The DON confirmed this breach of infection control, and the resident noted inconsistent PPE use among staff.
Failure to Monitor Lab Results Delayed UTI Treatment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to follow professional standards of nursing practice related to monitoring laboratory results for one resident with a history that included congestive heart failure and a urinary tract infection. The resident had a fall with increasing low back and sacral pain, worsening confusion, and dark, cloudy urine with sediment. A urine analysis and culture were ordered to evaluate for a UTI after the resident’s mental status worsened and low back pain continued. The urine sample was sent out and the laboratory results were available to the facility, with the UA showing a positive infection and the culture later identifying sensitivity to ciprofloxacin. Infection surveillance documentation later indicated the resident met criteria to begin antibiotics when the UA was positive, but the facility did not follow up on the lab results until several days later. The infection tracker also documented an onset date that did not match the available lab timeline, and the antibiotic was not ordered until after the infection surveillance form was completed. During interviews, the IPC stated she was responsible for infection control and wound care and said she usually checked the laboratory website for results Tuesday through Friday, noting she did not work weekends. The DON stated that lab results were sent to a fax machine and available online, and that staff should have been checking both sources, especially with a pending UA. The DON also stated the facility had no proof supporting the documented infection onset date and acknowledged that the lab results were first available earlier than when they were reviewed by staff.
Failure to Implement Infection Prevention and Control Program
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide and implement an infection prevention and control program. This deficiency was identified during the survey process, indicating that the required measures to prevent and control infections were not established or maintained as per regulatory standards. The report notes the absence of a comprehensive infection prevention and control program but does not provide further details regarding specific actions, inactions, or events, nor does it mention any particular residents or staff involved.
Failure to Notify Physician of Elevated Blood Glucose Levels per Order
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident with Type 2 diabetes mellitus received care in accordance with professional standards and physician orders regarding blood glucose monitoring and physician notification. The resident had active physician orders requiring blood glucose checks at bedtime and notification of the physician if levels were less than 70 or greater than 300 mg/dl. Additionally, there was an order for PRN blood sugar checks with special instructions to recheck if over 350 mg/dl. Review of the Medication Administration Record showed that on two occasions, the resident's blood glucose levels were recorded as 343 mg/dl and 340 mg/dl, both above the threshold requiring physician notification. There was no documentation in the resident's progress notes that the physician had been notified of these elevated blood glucose readings. Interviews with the nurses involved revealed that one nurse did not recall notifying the physician and would typically document such notifications in the progress notes, while the other nurse misunderstood the threshold for notification, believing it to be over 350 mg/dl instead of 300 mg/dl as per the order. The Director of Nursing confirmed that the expectation was for nurses to notify the physician for blood glucose levels over 300 mg/dl and to document this in the medical record, and stated that if it was not documented, it was not done.
Failure to Use Gait Belt During Resident Transfer
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency occurred when staff failed to use an assistive transfer device (gait belt) during a transfer for a resident with a history of myocardial infarction, pneumonia, and congestive heart failure. Observation showed that a registered nurse assisted the resident from bed to wheelchair by holding under the resident's arm and the back of his pants, rather than using a gait belt as required. The gait belt was present in the room but was not utilized during the transfer, and the resident confirmed that staff did not use it for him. Interviews with multiple staff members, including CNAs, the therapy director, and nursing leadership, confirmed that the resident's care plan and transfer profile specified a one-person contact guard assist with a gait belt. Staff consistently reported that gait belts should be used for all transfers unless the resident was independent or required a mechanical lift. Despite this, the nurse did not follow the established protocol, and there was no facility policy in place regarding transfers, with staff expected to follow therapy department recommendations.
Failure to Provide Timely and Properly Assisted Incontinence Care with Incomplete Documentation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide timely incontinence care, ensure the appropriate number of staff assisted with care, and document care for a resident with hemiplegia, reduced mobility, and incontinence. Interviews and record reviews revealed that the resident, who was cognitively intact, reported extended periods—sometimes up to 8-12 hours—without a brief change, depending on the staff on duty. Staff interviews confirmed that the resident required two-person assistance for bed mobility and brief changes, as documented in the care plan and resident profile, but at times only one staff member provided care. Documentation of brief changes was inconsistent, with significant gaps between recorded changes on multiple dates. The care plan specified a two-person assist for bed mobility and incontinence care, and the resident was always incontinent of bowel and bladder. Despite this, staff sometimes performed changes alone, and documentation did not reflect the frequency of care required. The DON acknowledged that if care was not documented, it was considered not done, and agreed that the resident should always have two-person assistance for these tasks. Facility policy required necessary services for residents unable to perform ADLs, including elimination and hygiene, but these were not consistently provided or recorded for this resident.
Improper Food Labeling and Dating in Kitchen
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure proper labeling and dating of foods in the kitchen, which could potentially lead to the spread of foodborne illness to all residents consuming food from the kitchen. During an initial tour of the main kitchen, a reach-in refrigerator was found to contain a lemonade pitcher with a prepare date of 8/1/2024 and a use-by date of 8/3/2024, along with several plastic storage containers of individual cups of mayonnaise, mustard, and tartar sauce, all lacking labels and dates. Additionally, a shallow pan with individual bread slices in individual Ziploc bags was also found without labels and dates. A dietary aide acknowledged the oversight and discarded the expired lemonade pitcher. On a subsequent tour, further issues were identified, including a plastic storage container of individual cups of ketchup without labels and dates, and various other items such as brown sugar, syrup, bread, hamburger buns, and hot dogs, all opened and lacking proper labeling and dating. The Certified Dietary Manager acknowledged the deficiencies and indicated plans to reeducate staff on labeling and dating procedures. The facility's storage policy, revised in 8/2023, requires opened packages to be stored in closed containers, labeled, and dated, aligning with the 2017 FDA Food Code requirements for ready-to-eat, time/temperature control for safety food.
Failure to Complete SCSA for Hospice Enrollment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to complete a Significant Change in Status Assessment (SCSA) for a resident after a significant change in health status, specifically when the resident enrolled in a hospice program. The resident, a female with diagnoses including respiratory failure, heart failure, high blood pressure, atrial fibrillation, anxiety, depression, and obstructive lung disease, was readmitted to the facility after a hospital stay and subsequently enrolled in hospice care. Despite the enrollment in hospice, which is a trigger for a SCSA, the facility did not complete the required assessment within the mandated 14-day period. The MDS Coordinator acknowledged that the Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) should have discussed the resident's change in health status to determine the need for a SCSA. However, the coordinator did not recall such a discussion taking place after the resident's enrollment in hospice. The Long-Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument 3.0 User's Manual specifies that a SCSA is necessary when a terminally ill resident enrolls in a hospice program, to ensure a coordinated care plan between the hospice and the nursing home. This oversight resulted in the potential for unassessed physical, mental, emotional, and psychosocial needs of the resident.
Failure to Implement Enhanced Barrier Precautions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to properly implement enhanced barrier precautions for Resident #11, who was admitted with chronic respiratory failure, pneumonia, and an indwelling urinary catheter. The resident was cognitively intact and required dependent assistance for various activities. The care plan indicated the need for enhanced barrier precautions due to the resident's indwelling catheter and open tracheostomy stoma with mucus and respiratory drainage. Despite this, during an observation, a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) entered the resident's room and provided personal care without donning a gown, which was required under the enhanced barrier precautions. The CNA reported using only gloves and was unaware of the enhanced barrier precautions, indicating a lack of training and understanding of the rationale behind these precautions. The Director of Nursing confirmed the breach of infection control measures, as the CNA did not wear the appropriate personal protective equipment. Resident #11 noted inconsistency among staff in wearing PPE and expressed a preference for its use if it protected others. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines highlight the risk of multidrug-resistant organism infections in skilled nursing facilities, particularly for residents with complex medical needs.
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 115 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 Centreville
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Optalis Health And Rehabilitation Of Three Rivers | 6.4 mi | ★★★★★ | 41 | 0 |
| The Orchards At Three Rivers | 7.6 mi | ★★★★★ | 49 | 1 |
| Froh Community Home | 10.4 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Life Care Center Of Lagrange | 19.5 mi | ★★★★★ | 4 | 0 |
| Medilodge Of Portage | 19.6 mi | ★★★★★ | 4 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Fairview Nursing And Rehabilitation Community.
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.