Above average — CMS composite of the measures below.
A standard survey is most likely before around December 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 Lake Taylor Hosp during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
Two residents experienced falls resulting in femur and hip fractures during staff-assisted transfers and personal care. In one case, a resident was not provided with a required knee immobilizer due to lack of staff awareness, leading to a fall. In another, a resident rolled out of bed while being turned by a CNA who did not call for additional help. Staff interviews revealed communication breakdowns and insufficient implementation of fall prevention policies.
Two residents with significant medical and functional needs did not receive appropriate meal assistance as required by their care plans and facility policy. One resident with dementia and vision impairment was not assisted with meal setup or feeding, resulting in poor intake, while another resident with quadriplegia and a history of dysphagia was not provided the necessary supervision or cueing during meals, leading to inadequate consumption. Staff were either unaware of the residents' needs or did not follow established interventions.
Dialysis Communication Gaps: A resident with CHF, CKD, and moderate cognitive impairment received hemodialysis three times weekly, but the care plan did not address dialysis treatment. Review of treatment records showed frequent missing post-dialysis documentation from the dialysis center, and staff interviews confirmed ongoing difficulty getting information back from the dialysis facility.
A resident with hemiplegia and severe cognitive impairment had side rails ordered for bed mobility and repositioning, but the record did not show that alternatives were explored, risks and benefits were documented as discussed, or informed consent was obtained. Staff said residents were admitted with side rails already on the beds, alternatives were not reviewed, and consent forms were not signed; the DON said she was unaware the documentation was required.
Low air loss mattresses were not maintained at the proper setting for two residents with pressure ulcers and significant mobility-related diagnoses. One resident’s mattress was observed flat and set at 50 despite a weight-based setting being required, and another resident’s mattress was observed set at 180 instead of being adjusted to the resident’s weight. Staff acknowledged the settings were incorrect and stated the mattresses should be set according to resident weight.
Failure to Prevent Accidents During Assisted Transfers and Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure resident safety and prevent accidents for two residents who required staff assistance during care. One resident, with a history of congestive heart failure, a left knee prosthetic joint, and chronic kidney disease, was identified as a fall risk and required a knee immobilizer during transfers and ambulation. Despite medical orders and care plan interventions specifying the use of a knee immobilizer, the resident was transferred by a CNA who was unaware of this requirement and did not observe the immobilizer in the room. During an assisted transfer from the commode to the bed, the resident was not wearing the immobilizer, resulting in a fall and a mid femur fracture. The CNA reported not knowing about the immobilizer, and the LPN confirmed that communication regarding the immobilizer was lacking. Another resident, admitted with diagnoses including atrial fibrillation, osteoporosis, and a history of hip fracture, required one-person physical assistance with all activities of daily living, including bed mobility. During incontinence care, the resident rolled out of bed while being turned by a CNA and sustained a left hip fracture. The CNA stated that the resident's leg was sliding off the bed, and while attempting to move to the other side to assist, the resident fell to the floor. The CNA acknowledged that calling for assistance could have been an option but did not do so, stating the incident happened quickly. Interviews with staff, including the DON, revealed a lack of effective communication and root cause analysis regarding these incidents. The facility's policy on fall risk assessment and prevention was in place, but the events demonstrated failures in its implementation, particularly in ensuring staff awareness of resident-specific safety interventions and the need for adequate supervision during care.
Failure to Provide Appropriate Meal Assistance for Two Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide appropriate meal assistance to two residents who required support with activities of daily living, specifically eating. One resident with dementia, vision impairment, and dysphagia was observed on multiple occasions receiving no staff assistance with meal setup or feeding, despite care plan interventions specifying the need for adaptive utensils and divided plates. This resident was served meals in bed with covered trays and was not assisted by staff, resulting in poor or no meal consumption. Staff interviews revealed a lack of awareness regarding the resident's need for feeding assistance, and the resident was not included on the feeding assistance list at the nurse's station. Another resident with quadriplegia, multiple sclerosis, and a history of dysphagia was also not provided with the required supervision or cueing during meals. This resident was served meals in bed with the door closed and received no observed assistance, leading to poor meal intake and refusal of food. The resident's care plan did not address eating ability or ADL needs, and there was inconsistency between the feeding assistance list and the diet order instructions. Staff interviews confirmed that the resident was supposed to receive supervision or cueing during meals, but this was not provided. Observations, record reviews, and staff interviews demonstrated that the facility did not follow its own policy to provide assistance with activities of daily living based on individual care needs. Both residents experienced inadequate meal assistance, with staff either unaware of or not following care plan interventions and feeding lists, resulting in poor nutritional intake.
Dialysis Communication Gaps
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure ongoing communication and collaboration with the dialysis facility for one resident who received hemodialysis. The resident was admitted with diagnoses including congestive heart failure and chronic kidney disease, had a BIMS score of 3 out of 11 indicating moderate cognitive impairment, and was documented as receiving hemodialysis. The resident’s care plan dated 08/26/25 did not include dialysis treatment, although physician orders dated 08/22/25 directed hemodialysis every Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday. Review of the resident’s Treatment Details Report forms dated 07/26/25 through 09/18/25 showed 13 out of 19 days without documentation from the dialysis center after treatment. During interviews, the Nurse Manager stated nursing staff completed the dialysis communication log and sent it with the resident’s binder to dialysis, but it had been a challenge receiving post-treatment communication back from the dialysis center. The Unit Secretary stated she had reached out to the dialysis center and reported the issue to her supervisor, but it remained ongoing, and the DON stated that if there was information, the dialysis center needed to communicate with the facility.
Side rail use lacked documented alternatives, risk-benefit discussion, and informed consent
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that alternative measures were explored before side rails were used, that the risks and benefits of side rail use were documented as discussed with the resident or representative, and that informed consent was obtained before bed rail use for one resident who was reviewed for side rails. The resident was admitted with hemiplegia and had a BIMS score of 3 out of 15, indicating severe cognitive impairment. The physician order dated 09/08/25 directed 1/2 rails every shift to assist with bed mobility and repositioning, but the nursing admission assessment contained no documentation that alternatives were explored, that risk and benefits were discussed, or that informed consent was obtained prior to bed rail use. The resident's care plan dated 09/09/25 did not include a care plan for side rail use. During observation, the resident was in bed with side rails up on both sides. During interviews, an LPN stated residents were admitted with side rails already on the beds, staff did not look at alternatives, and although risks and benefits were discussed, the resident or family did not sign anything. Another LPN said residents who wanted side rails were educated on the risks and benefits, but alternatives were not reviewed because the rails were already on the beds, and the consent forms were not signed. The DON stated she was unaware that documentation was needed showing alternatives were explored, risks and benefits were discussed, and signed consent was in the medical record.
Low Air Loss Mattresses Not Set to Resident Weight
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain low air loss mattresses at the proper setting for two residents, R9 and R15, during observations, interview, and record review. The manufacturer’s manual provided by the facility stated the pressure adjust knob was to be set using the resident’s weight as a guide. R9’s records showed an admission date of 07/09/18, a BIMS score of 13/15, quadriplegia, multiple sclerosis, and two unstageable pressure ulcers. R9’s orders and care plan identified the need for a low air loss mattress, and her weight was documented as 123.6 pounds. During observation, R9 stated her mattress was “going down,” and the mattress was noted to be flat with the setting at 50. CNA9 observed the mattress and confirmed the setting and flatness, and LPN4 stated the setting was incorrect and should be based on the resident’s weight. LPN5 later stated the mattress should be adjusted according to weight and that R9’s setting should be between 120 and 150. R15’s records showed an admission date of 05/37/23, a BIMS score of 9/15, diabetes mellitus, hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting the left non-dominant side, osteomyelitis, and two pressure ulcers. R15’s care plan and order identified the use of a low air loss mattress, and her weight was documented as 144.4 pounds. On multiple observations, R15 was asleep in bed with the air mattress set at 180. LPN4 stated the setting should not be at 180 and should be set at the resident’s weight, then entered the room and reset the mattress between 120 and 150. LPN5 stated the purpose of the air mattress was to promote healing and should be at the appropriate setting.
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 220 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 Norfolk
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Autumn Care Of Norfolk | 1.3 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Cypress Pointe Rehabilitation And Nursing | 1.9 mi | ★★★★★ | 14 | 0 |
| Waterside Health & Rehab Center | 2.4 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Norview Heights Rehabilitation And Nursing | 3.2 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Bayside Health & Rehabilitation Center | 3.9 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Lake Taylor Hosp.
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.