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 Apr 23, 2026
5
Serious findings on record
most recent May 16, 2024
$16,801
Fines, last 3 years
3.94
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 · May 16, 2024 · F-0580 · triggered by a complaint
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 (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: May 4, 2024 (Past Non-Compliance)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · May 16, 2024 · 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: May 4, 2024 (Past Non-Compliance)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · May 16, 2024 · F-0684 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Why it matters: Care that strays from doctor's orders or ignores the resident's wishes can lead to declining health and avoidable harm.
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: May 4, 2024 (Past Non-Compliance)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · May 16, 2024 · 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: May 4, 2024 (Past Non-Compliance)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · May 16, 2024 · F-0726 · triggered by a complaint
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): 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: May 4, 2024 (Past Non-Compliance)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 18 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
D · Potential for more than minimal 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
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, 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 18 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
Apr 23, 2026
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 23, 2026
D · Potential for more than minimal 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
Jan 8, 2026
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, 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
Feb 14, 2025
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not protect residents from misuse of their belongings or money — this is called misappropriation, and it includes theft or improper use of a resident's property or funds. · from a complaint · F-0602
Feb 14, 2025
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
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. · F-0812
May 16, 2024
▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, 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
May 16, 2024
▲ 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
May 16, 2024
▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolated
The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint · F-0684
May 16, 2024
▲ 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
May 16, 2024
▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolated
The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · from a complaint · F-0726
Dec 12, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal 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. · from a complaint · F-0600
Nov 1, 2023
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. · from a complaint · F-0803
Nov 1, 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
Nov 1, 2023
F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. · from a complaint · F-0867
Nov 1, 2023
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not honor residents' right to form and take part in resident or family groups, such as a resident council. · from a complaint · F-0565
Nov 1, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not allow residents to take their own medications when a clinical review showed they could do so safely. Residents have this right if their care team determines it's appropriate. · from a complaint · F-0554
Nov 1, 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
Nov 1, 2023
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. · from a complaint · F-0761
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (2 → 2).
Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations:
8
Serious citations (G–L):
0
2024
All citations:
5
Serious citations (G–L):
5
2025
All citations:
2
Serious citations (G–L):
0
2026
All citations:
3
Serious citations (G–L):
0
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
Year
Citations
Serious (G–L)
Worst severity that year
2023
8
0
F
2024
5
5
J ▲
2025
2
0
E
2026
3
0
D
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
May 16, 2024
Fine
$16,801
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:
3.94
North Carolina average:
4.01
U.S. average:
3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility:
0.71
North Carolina average:
0.64
U.S. average:
0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility:
3.59
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)
3.94
4.01
3.95
top 34% in North Carolina; top 42% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours
0.71
0.64
0.69
top 26% in North Carolina; top 35% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing
3.59
3.56
3.50
top 31% in North Carolina; top 38% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)
0.48
0.41
0.48
top 25% in North Carolina; top 35% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)
69.1
49.0
45.8
bottom 10% in North Carolina; bottom 6% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)
37.5
45.7
42.9
top 36% in North Carolina; top 42% 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 3.65, RN 0.66, weekend 3.33.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.65 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 Saluda. 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.
All 14 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
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.