Average — CMS composite of the measures below.
The next survey window likely opens around February 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 Farmville Health & Rehab Center during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
Care plans were not developed for side rail use for several residents who were observed with side rails engaged, and a resident’s care plan for a right resting hand splint was not implemented as ordered. Interviews with RN and MDS staff confirmed side rails should have been included in the care plans, while record review and observation showed the splint was frequently not in use despite the resident’s order and care plan.
Failure to provide privacy during tracheostomy care occurred when an LPN performed bedside trach care for a resident with a tracheostomy while the room door, privacy curtain, and window blinds remained open. Other residents, visitors, and staff passed by during the procedure, and additional staff entered the room to assist while privacy was not maintained.
Failure to Electronically Submit Completed Discharge MDS: A resident’s discharge MDS was completed and documented the resident as death in facility, but the assessment remained in progress with no accepted transmission date. The MDS coordinator stated the assessment was probably overlooked and needed to be sent, and the RAI Manual required electronic submission within the specified timeframe.
A resident’s annual MDS was not accurately completed because Section A1510 was not coded to show a diagnosis of intellectual disability. The resident had diagnoses of mild intellectual disabilities and bipolar disorder, a BIMS score indicating cognitive intactness, a prior level II PASRR screening, and a care plan addressing psychosocial well-being needs related to intellectual disability and impaired cognitive function. An RN reviewed the assessment and confirmed the coding error.
A resident with schizoaffective disorder, anxiety disorder, and major depressive disorder had a level I PASARR that recommended a level II evaluation, but the facility did not ensure the level II PASARR was completed. The resident’s MDS showed a BIMS score of 15, indicating cognitive intactness, and the SW reported sending multiple referrals to an outside company that completed level II PASARRs.
A resident with CKD, DM, osteoarthritis, convulsions, moderate cognitive impairment, and impaired upper-limb ROM was ordered to wear a right resting hand splint to reduce contracture and improve finger extension. Staff failed to consistently assist with and document the splint use, and the resident was observed multiple times without the splint; an LPN said it would be checked after med pass, and another LPN later found it in the bedside drawer and applied it. The OT stated nursing had been informed multiple times that the resident needed help applying the splint across shifts.
Failure to follow an ordered bed safety intervention: a resident with a provider order for bed bolsters did not have the bolster in place during repeated observations while lying in bed. An LPN stated the bolster had not been used for months after the resident was switched to an air mattress, while the unit manager confirmed bolsters are used for fall prevention, help define bed boundaries, and do not serve the same purpose as an air mattress for a legally blind resident.
Failure to address significant weight loss. A resident lost over 10% of body weight, but the RD did not document addressing the loss. The RD stated she relied on weekly weight reports, only reviewed percentages and day intervals, and did not look at the actual weights to identify the loss; she also said the loss was desirable over time.
Failure to assess, educate, and obtain consent for side rail use: Three residents were observed in bed with bilateral side rails engaged, but their records showed no side rail assessment, no education on risks and benefits, no informed consent, and no related care plan information. An RN stated that therapy and nursing complete an Enabler Assessment before side rails are used, and the facility policy required risk review and informed consent prior to installation.
Care Plans Missing for Side Rail Use and Splint Plan Not Followed
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop care plans for the use of side rails for four residents. Resident #25, Resident #40, Resident #103, and Resident #91 were each observed in bed with side rails engaged, including bilateral side rails for three residents and a right-hand side rail for one resident. Reviews of their care plans showed no information related to side rail use for any of these residents. The MDS Coordinator and RN stated that side rails should be included on a resident’s care plan because they are unique to some residents and are not needed by all residents. Resident #25 was observed lying in bed with bilateral side rails engaged on multiple occasions, and the same was documented for Resident #40 and Resident #103. Resident #91 was observed sitting up in bed with the right-hand side rail engaged. Despite these observations, the care plans dated for each resident contained no side rail-related interventions or information. The interviews with RN #5 and the MDS Coordinator indicated that care plans are intended to reflect each resident’s individual needs and that side rails should be addressed in the plan. The facility also failed to implement the comprehensive care plan for Resident #11’s right resting hand splint. Resident #11 had diagnoses including CKD, DM, osteoarthritis, and convulsions, and the most recent MDS showed moderate cognitive impairment and dependence for multiple ADLs. The care plan included an approach for a right resting hand splint to improve right hand function, and physician orders stated the resident was fitted with the splint to reduce contracture and improve finger extension, with staff assistance needed for application. However, MAR documentation showed the splint was frequently coded off across day, evening, and night shifts, and the resident was observed without the splint on multiple occasions. When asked, the resident stated the splint helps keep the hand open more and said they did not know where it was.
Failure to Provide Privacy During Tracheostomy Care
Penalty
Summary
Privacy was not provided during tracheostomy care for one resident who had been assessed on the most recent MDS as having a tracheostomy and receiving tracheostomy care at the facility. During an observation of tracheostomy care, an LPN performed the procedure at the resident’s bedside, including changing the inner cannula, cleaning the outer stoma, and suctioning the tracheostomy, while the room door remained open, the privacy curtain remained open and pushed back to the wall, and the window blinds remained open. During the procedure, other residents, visitors, and staff were observed passing by in the hallway, and additional staff, including the unit manager and the DON, entered the room to assist while the door, curtain, and blinds remained open. In interview, the LPN stated that privacy is provided by pulling the curtain in semi-private rooms and closing the door in private rooms, and acknowledged that the door should have been closed during the tracheostomy care but was forgotten.
Failure to Electronically Submit Completed Discharge MDS
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to electronically submit a completed discharge MDS for Resident #19, whose discharge assessment had an ARD of 1/18/26. Review of the clinical record showed that the discharge MDS was completed on 1/18/26 and Section A documented the resident as death in facility, but as of the survey date of 3/11/26 the assessment remained listed as in progress and did not show an accepted date, indicating it had not been electronically submitted. During interview on 3/11/26, the MDS coordinator stated she is notified of discharge MDS needs through morning meetings, the social worker, or the electronic medical record, and that a discharge MDS should be completed within 7 days. She also stated that an assessment should show production accepted when it has been transmitted and accepted, and after reviewing Resident #19’s MDS in the electronic medical record, she said it was probably overlooked and needed to be sent. The RAI Manual, Version 3.0, dated October 2025, section 2.6, stated that a discharge assessment is to be electronically submitted no later than the MDS completion date plus 14 calendar days.
MDS Assessment Not Accurately Coded for Intellectual Disability
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to accurately complete an annual MDS assessment for Resident #105 by not coding Section A1510 to indicate the resident had a diagnosis of intellectual disability. Resident #105’s diagnoses included mild intellectual disabilities and bipolar disorder, and the annual MDS with an ARD of 04/01/25 included a BIMS score of 13, indicating the resident was cognitively intact. Despite the resident’s clinical record showing a level II screening completed on 02/22/23 and the comprehensive care plan identifying psychosocial well-being needs related to level II PASRR, intellectual disability, and impaired cognitive function/impaired thought processes related to mild disability, Section A1510 was not coded to reflect the intellectual disability diagnosis. During interview, RN #1 reviewed the annual MDS and confirmed the diagnosis had not been coded in Section A1510.
Failure to Complete Level II PASARR
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a level II PASARR was completed for Resident #7, whose diagnoses included schizoaffective disorder, anxiety disorder, and major depressive disorder. The resident’s quarterly MDS assessment showed a BIMS score of 15, indicating the resident was cognitively intact. During record review, the surveyor could not locate a level I PASARR, but the Social Worker later provided a level I PASARR completed on 02/12/26 that marked the resident for referral for a level II evaluation. The Social Worker stated referrals had been sent to the company that completed level II PASARRs on 02/12/26, 02/23/26, and 02/26/26 because the facility did not complete level II evaluations onsite. The issue was reviewed during an end-of-day meeting with facility leadership, and no further information was provided before the exit conference.
Failure to Provide Ordered Splinting and ROM Support
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide services to prevent a decrease in range of motion for Resident #11, who was admitted with diagnoses including chronic kidney disease, diabetes mellitus, osteoarthritis, and convulsions. The resident’s most recent MDS coded him as moderately cognitively impaired and dependent on staff for multiple ADLs, with impaired upper-limb range of motion on one side. His care plan identified the need for a right resting hand splint to improve right hand function, and physician orders stated that the resident had been fitted with the splint to reduce contracture and improve finger extension, with staff assistance needed to apply it. Review of the MAR showed the splint was documented as off or not in use on multiple dates and shifts in February and March 2026. The resident was observed on three occasions without the splint on his right hand, and when asked, he stated he was supposed to wear it and did not know where it was. An LPN stated the splint would be checked after med pass, and another LPN later found the splint in the bedside cabinet drawer and applied it with the resident’s help. The OT stated the resident needed help putting the splint on and that nursing had been informed multiple times about the need for assistance across different shifts.
Failure to Follow Ordered Bed Safety Intervention
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to implement a safety intervention for Resident #103 by not placing the ordered bolster on the resident’s bed. The resident had a provider order dated 9/13/24 to add bolsters to the bed for resident safety, but the bolster was not observed during multiple observations on 3/9/26 and 3/10/26 while the resident was lying in bed. The absence of the bolster was confirmed by CNA #1 and LPN #1 on 3/10/26. During interview, LPN #1 stated the resident had not had a bolster on the bed since the beginning of 2026 and explained that the resident had been switched to an air mattress and staff did not feel the bolster was still needed. RN #5, the unit manager, stated bolsters are used as a fall prevention intervention, help define the perimeters of the bed, and were especially helpful for this resident because she is legally blind. RN #5 also stated that an air mattress serves a different purpose and does not take the place of bolsters, and that if there is a provider order for a bolster, the order should be followed.
Failure to Address Significant Weight Loss
Penalty
Summary
Facility staff failed to address a resident's significant weight loss for Resident #106. The resident's clinical record showed weights of 209.9 pounds on 3/10/25 and 188.6 pounds on 9/8/25, a 10.15% loss. Review of the record found no evidence that the Registered Dietician addressed this significant weight loss, and the resident's weights later stabilized after 9/8/25. During interview on 3/11/26, the RD stated she reviews a weekly weight report, only sees what the report shows, and would not have identified the significant loss if it did not appear on the report she pulled that day. She also stated she only looked at percentages and the number of days between weights for weights taken 30 and 180 days prior, not the actual weights themselves, and said she would have written a note if she had known about the loss. She further stated that for this resident, the weight loss was desirable over time.
Failure to Assess, Educate, and Obtain Consent for Side Rail Use
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to implement bed rail requirements for three residents, including Resident #25, Resident #40, and Resident #103. Each of these residents was observed lying in bed with bilateral side rails engaged on multiple dates and times during the survey, as verified by CNA #1. For Resident #25, the clinical record showed no evidence of a side rail assessment, resident education, or consent for side rails, and the care plan dated 12/19/25 contained no information related to side rail use. Similar record reviews for Resident #40 and Resident #103 also revealed no evidence of a side rail assessment, resident education, consent, or care plan information related to side rails. During interview on 3/11/26, RN #5 stated that when a resident is admitted, therapy assesses the need for side rails for bed mobility, and if recommended, nursing completes an Enabler Assessment to evaluate safe use and provide education on risks and benefits before side rails are implemented. The facility policy also stated that if a bed rail or side rail is used, the facility will evaluate risks, review risks and benefits with the resident or representative, and obtain informed consent before installation. The Administrator and DON were informed of the concerns on 3/11/26, and no additional information was provided prior to exit.
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 10 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 2 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 Farmville
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holly Manor Rehab And Nursing | 1.8 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Heritage Hall Dillwyn | 17.7 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Amelia Rehabilitation And Healthcare Center | 22.9 mi | ★★★★★ | 10 | 2 |
| Wayland Nursing And Rehabilitation Center | 23 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Appomattox Health & Rehabilitation Center | 23.9 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Farmville Health & Rehab 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 October 2026) and official state health department websites.