Certified for both programmes. Certification means the facility can bill Medicaid — it does not mean a Medicaid-funded bed is free right now, so ask directly. Who pays for nursing home care →
The abuse flag means inspectors cited this facility for abuse that caused harm to a resident within the past year, or potential for harm in each of the last two years. Source: CMS.
1/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Aug 2, 2023
10
Serious findings on record
most recent Oct 9, 2025
$132,760
Fines, last 3 years
—
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
⚠ The most recent standard health inspection was more than 2 years ago — conditions may have changed.
The health inspection star above is graded on a curve within each state — a set share of each state's facilities gets each star level — so a facility can have few citations and still rate 2–3 stars if others in its state did even better. The overall rating combines that inspection score with staffing and quality measures from resident assessments and claims.
Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Oct 9, 2025 · F-0600 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors.
Why it matters: Abuse and neglect cause direct physical and emotional harm and are among the most serious failures a nursing home can have.
Severity (J): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Nov 18, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Oct 9, 2025 · F-0610 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do.
Why it matters: When allegations aren't investigated, harm to residents can continue unchecked.
Severity (J): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Nov 18, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Oct 9, 2025 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.
Severity (J): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Nov 18, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Aug 2, 2023 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.
Severity (J): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Aug 23, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Aug 2, 2023 · F-0865 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not have a written plan describing how it runs its quality improvement program — the ongoing process of finding problems in care and fixing them.
Why it matters: Without a real quality improvement process, the same care problems tend to repeat instead of getting fixed.
Severity (J): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Aug 23, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away.
Why it matters: A family could learn about a serious injury or decline days later, after the chance to act has passed.
Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: May 4, 2018 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors.
Why it matters: Abuse and neglect cause direct physical and emotional harm and are among the most serious failures a nursing home can have.
Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: May 4, 2018 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
The facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable.
Why it matters: In the critical first days, staff may not know a new resident's medications, diet, or fall risks.
Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: May 4, 2018 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.
Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: May 4, 2018 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it.
Why it matters: Untreated pain causes needless suffering and can lead to depression, poor sleep, and declining health.
Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: May 4, 2018 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 28 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
J · Immediate jeopardy, isolated
The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaintF-0600
J · Immediate jeopardy, isolated
The facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do. · from a complaintF-0610
J · Immediate jeopardy, isolated
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaintF-0689
View all 28 inspection findingsShow only the latest 3 findings
CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed — that window is CMS's, not ours. Within it, every citation CMS publishes for this facility is listed here: none excluded.
Date
Severity
What the facility was cited for
Oct 9, 2025
▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolated
The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint · F-0600
Oct 9, 2025
▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolated
The facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do. · from a complaint · F-0610
Oct 9, 2025
▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolated
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689
Aug 2, 2023
▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolated
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689
Aug 2, 2023
▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolated
The facility did not have a written plan describing how it runs its quality improvement program — the ongoing process of finding problems in care and fixing them. · from a complaint · F-0865
Aug 2, 2023
F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · from a complaint · F-0812
Aug 2, 2023
F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · from a complaint · F-0880
Aug 2, 2023
F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not designate a qualified infection preventionist — a trained person responsible for running the infection prevention and control program. · from a complaint · F-0882
Aug 2, 2023
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint · F-0584
Aug 2, 2023
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. · from a complaint · F-0656
Aug 2, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. · from a complaint · F-0550
Aug 2, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · from a complaint · F-0580
Aug 2, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. · from a complaint · F-0583
Aug 2, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not give the resident or their representative written notice of how long it would hold the resident's bed during a hospital stay or approved leave. · from a complaint · F-0625
Aug 2, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · from a complaint · F-0641
Aug 2, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not provide the help residents need with basic daily activities — like bathing, dressing, eating, and using the bathroom — for residents who cannot do these things on their own. · from a complaint · F-0677
Aug 2, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not electronically submit complete and accurate staffing information to the government, based on payroll and other verifiable records. · from a complaint · F-0851
May 2, 2019
F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The facility's menus did not meet residents' nutritional needs, or were not prepared in advance, followed as written, kept up to date, or reviewed by a dietician. · F-0803
May 2, 2019
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804
Apr 18, 2018
▲ G · Actual harm, isolated
The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · F-0580
Apr 18, 2018
▲ G · Actual harm, isolated
The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · F-0600
Apr 18, 2018
▲ G · Actual harm, isolated
The facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable. · F-0655
Apr 18, 2018
▲ G · Actual harm, isolated
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689
Apr 18, 2018
▲ G · Actual harm, isolated
The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · F-0697
Apr 18, 2018
F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not provide each resident with a nourishing, tasty, well-balanced diet that meets their daily nutritional and special dietary needs. · F-0800
Apr 18, 2018
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care. · F-0578
Apr 18, 2018
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641
Apr 18, 2018
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not try to gradually reduce doses of mood- and mind-altering medications or use non-drug approaches first, as required, or used 'as needed' psychiatric drugs without proper limits. · F-0758
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (2 → 14).
Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2018
All citations:
9
Serious citations (G–L):
5
2019
All citations:
2
Serious citations (G–L):
0
2023
All citations:
14
Serious citations (G–L):
2
2025
All citations:
3
Serious citations (G–L):
3
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
Year
Citations
Serious (G–L)
Worst severity that year
2018
9
5
G ▲
2019
2
0
F
2023
14
2
J ▲
2025
3
3
J ▲
Counts reflect the current CMS public record (~3 inspection cycles plus complaint investigations); years with no surveys show no row. Inspection frequency varies, so compare severity as well as counts.
Every penalty CMS publishes for this facility in the 3-year window is listed —none excluded. The count and the dollar total come from two different CMS datasets and agree for this facility. Penalties older than the window are dropped by CMS before publication, not by us.
Date
Type
Amount / length
Oct 9, 2025
Fine
$125,418
Oct 10, 2023
Fine
$7,342
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
This facilityTennessee averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility:
Not reported
Tennessee average:
3.62
U.S. average:
3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility:
Not reported
Tennessee average:
0.57
U.S. average:
0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility:
Not reported
Tennessee average:
3.15
U.S. average:
3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
Measure
This facility
Tennessee avg
U.S. avg
Where it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
—
3.62
3.95
—
Registered Nurse hours
—
0.57
0.69
—
Weekend total nurse staffing
—
3.15
3.50
—
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)
—
0.39
0.48
—
Total nursing staff turnover (%)
—
48.9
45.8
—
RN turnover (%)
—
43.2
42.9
—
Hours are per resident per day for the most recent quarter of payroll data in this CMS release (2026-08-01) — the same quarter for every facility — case-mix adjusted by CMS so facilities caring for sicker residents can be compared fairly (same basis as the CMS staffing star). "Top X%" means better than most facilities: more staffing hours, or lower turnover. Raw (unadjusted) reported hours: total —, RN —, weekend —.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (— here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 1/5.
Quality measures: assessments & claims
Note: CMS combines facility-reported resident assessments (MDS) with claims-based measures. These are different sources from on-site inspection findings. Read the measures alongside inspection and staffing records; a high QM rating does not establish that a home is safe.
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Antioch TN Opco, LLC. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
Calculate a stay from a quote you receive
Use a written private-pay quote. This worksheet adds only the amounts you enter; it does not calculate Medicare, Medicaid or insurance benefits.
Formula: (room rate + daily extras) × days + one-time charges. A 30-day scenario is not a calendar-month quote. Refundable deposits, rate changes and charges you omit are not automatically included. Entries are not saved or sent to our server.
Before you compare prices
Request the room type, effective date and itemized daily rate in writing.
Ask about therapy, medicines, supplies, care-level charges, deposits, refunds and annual increases.
Confirm insurance or Medicaid eligibility and bed availability directly; certification alone does not guarantee either.
CMS records place this facility in Davidson, TN — 20 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.