1264 Airport Road, Marion, NC 28752 (opens Google Maps) · Mc Dowell County · (828) 652-6701· 110 certified beds · avg 103 residents/day · certified since Aug 1, 1980 · Medicare and Medicaid certified
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 →
Part of chain: SABER HEALTHCARE GROUP (126 facilities, chain avg rating 2.9★)
2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Feb 26, 2026
1
Serious findings on record
most recent Mar 26, 2026
$10,364
Fines, last 3 years
3.27
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 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 · Mar 26, 2026 · 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: Apr 16, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 8 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaintF-0842
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not coordinate resident assessments with the state's pre-admission screening program for mental illness and intellectual disabilities, or failed to refer residents for the special services they need. F-0644
View all 8 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
Mar 26, 2026
▲ 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
Mar 26, 2026
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint · F-0842
Feb 26, 2026
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not coordinate resident assessments with the state's pre-admission screening program for mental illness and intellectual disabilities, or failed to refer residents for the special services they need. · F-0644
Feb 26, 2026
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
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. · F-0607
Feb 26, 2026
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · F-0755
Feb 26, 2026
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
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. · F-0761
Feb 26, 2026
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
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. · F-0880
Aug 16, 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
Inspection trend by year
Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations:
1
Serious citations (G–L):
0
2026
All citations:
7
Serious citations (G–L):
1
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
Year
Citations
Serious (G–L)
Worst severity that year
2023
1
0
D
2026
7
1
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
Feb 26, 2026
Fine
$10,364
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 facilityNorth Carolina averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility:
3.27
North Carolina average:
4.01
U.S. average:
3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility:
0.62
North Carolina average:
0.64
U.S. average:
0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility:
2.84
North Carolina average:
3.56
U.S. average:
3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
Measure
This facility
North Carolina avg
U.S. avg
Where it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
3.27
4.01
3.95
bottom 19% in North Carolina; bottom 25% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours
0.62
0.64
0.69
top 37% in North Carolina; top 46% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing
2.84
3.56
3.50
bottom 15% in North Carolina; bottom 22% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)
0.23
0.41
0.48
bottom 28% in North Carolina; bottom 18% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)
35.6
49.0
45.8
top 18% in North Carolina; top 25% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)
47.4
45.7
42.9
bottom 46% in North Carolina; bottom 40% in the U.S.
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 3.18, RN 0.60, weekend 2.76.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.18 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 3/5.
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 Autumn Care of Marion. 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.
Showing 20 of 26 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 6 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.
Other facilities in the same chain
CMS lists this facility under the chain Saber Healthcare Group — 126 facilities in the current records. Chain membership says who operates these homes. It says nothing about how any individual one of them was inspected; each has its own record.