Asbury Health and Rehabilitation Center
3211 Bishops Way Lane, Charlotte, NC 28215 · Mecklenburg County · 120 certified beds · avg 107 residents/day · certified since Jul 16, 2008
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 2/5
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 self-reported quality measures.
Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, one-off · Oct 16, 2024 · F-0726
The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident.
Why it matters: Undertrained caregivers are more likely to miss warning signs and make care mistakes.
Severity (J): Inspectors found a situation that put a resident's life or safety in immediate danger, affecting one or a few residents. The facility must fix it immediately — these citations often come with large fines.
Corrected: Nov 8, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, one-off · Oct 16, 2024 · F-0880
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.
Why it matters: Weak infection control lets illnesses like flu, COVID-19, and drug-resistant infections spread quickly among vulnerable residents.
Severity (J): Inspectors found a situation that put a resident's life or safety in immediate danger, affecting one or a few residents. The facility must fix it immediately — these citations often come with large fines.
Corrected: Nov 8, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Sep 30, 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 (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.
Corrected: Oct 11, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
All citations in the current public record (19)
CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 30, 2025 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | 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 |
| Sep 30, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Sep 30, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection. |
| Sep 30, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. |
| Sep 30, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Oct 16, 2024 | ▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, one-off | The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. |
| Oct 16, 2024 | ▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, one-off | 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. |
| Oct 16, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Oct 16, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not let a resident help develop and carry out their own plan of care — the written roadmap of the services and support they'll receive, built around their personal goals and preferences. |
| Oct 16, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not give residents proper notice about what Medicare or Medicaid covers, or about charges the resident might owe for services that aren't covered. |
| Oct 16, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not fully assess residents on time — a complete assessment of health, abilities, and needs is required when a resident is first admitted and at least once every 12 months after that. |
| Oct 16, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. |
| Jun 8, 2023 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | 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. |
| Jun 8, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not honor residents' right to form and take part in resident or family groups, such as a resident council. |
| Jun 8, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Jun 8, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. |
| Jun 8, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand. |
| Jun 8, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. |
| Jun 8, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (7 → 5).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 7 | 0 | F |
| 2024 | 7 | 2 | J ▲ |
| 2025 | 5 | 1 | G ▲ |
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.
Fines and enforcement (last 3 years)
2 fines totaling $47,996.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 30, 2025 | Fine | $9,620 |
| Oct 16, 2024 | Fine | $38,376 |
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
| Measure | This facility | North Carolina avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 5.08 | 4.01 | 3.95 | top 11% in North Carolina; top 12% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.55 | 0.64 | 0.69 | top 45% in North Carolina; bottom 45% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.80 | 3.56 | 3.50 | top 9% in North Carolina; top 8% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.44 | 0.41 | 0.48 | top 30% in North Carolina; top 41% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 100.0 | 49.0 | 45.8 | bottom 1% in North Carolina; bottom 1% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 100.0 | 45.7 | 42.9 | bottom 1% in North Carolina; bottom 1% in the U.S. |
Hours are per resident per day, 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 4.66, RN 0.51, weekend 4.41. Staffing rating: 3/5.
Self-reported quality measures
Note: these ratings are based on data the facility reports about itself to CMS. They are not independently verified by inspectors, and can look better than inspection findings. Give more weight to the inspection results above.
Quality measures rating: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 3/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5
Who owns this facility
Non profit - Other
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aldersgate United Methodist Retirement Community, INC. | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 09/01/2025 |
| Aldersgate United Methodist Retirement Community, INC. | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2025 |
| Patterson Hodge, Angella | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/12/2012 |
| Patterson Hodge, Angella | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/12/2012 |
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "How do you verify that your nurses and aides have the skills to care for residents with needs like my family member's?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
- "What specific steps do you take to prevent abuse and neglect, and how are staff trained on them?"
- "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "How are residents and families included in care plan meetings, and how often do those meetings happen?"
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the results and plan of correction from your most recent state inspection?"
Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pine Crest Health & Rehabilitation | 0.8 mi | Charlotte, NC | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Peak Resources - Charlotte | 1.6 mi | Charlotte, NC | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Wilora Lake Healthcare | 2.0 mi | Charlotte, NC | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Redwood Health & Rehab | 2.4 mi | Charlotte, NC | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Pelican Health at Charlotte | 3.1 mi | Charlotte, NC | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | SFF |
| Crown Haven Health and Rehabilitation | 3.2 mi | Charlotte, NC | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| White Oak Manor - Charlotte | 3.3 mi | Charlotte, NC | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Novant Health Presbyterian Medical Center-Snu | 3.5 mi | Charlotte, NC | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Rockwell Park Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center | 4.2 mi | Charlotte, NC | —/5 | SFF | |
| Pelican Health Randolph LLC | 4.5 mi | Charlotte, NC | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Sardis Oaks | 5.3 mi | Charlotte, NC | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| University Place Nursing and Rehabilitation Center | 5.9 mi | Charlotte, NC | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 345544.