GeorgiaCarrollton

Carrollton Manor, Incorporated

2455 Oak Grove Church Road, Carrollton, GA 30117 · Carroll County · 100 certified beds · avg 85 residents/day · certified since Mar 1, 1997

Abuse citation flag (CMS)

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)
2
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
4.13
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)

Health inspection rating: ★☆☆☆☆1/5 · CMS overall rating: 1/5

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)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Apr 25, 2026 · F-0600

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): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: May 27, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Apr 25, 2026 · F-0686

The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving.

Why it matters: Bedsores are painful, can become deeply infected, and in serious cases can be life-threatening.

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: May 27, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (38)

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Apr 25, 2026▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe 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.
Apr 25, 2026▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving.
Apr 25, 2026F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not provide required paperwork or notices about a resident's needs, their right to appeal a transfer or discharge, or the facility's bed-hold policy (how long a bed is saved during a hospital stay).
Apr 25, 2026F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe 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.
Apr 25, 2026F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Apr 25, 2026F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe 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.
Apr 25, 2026F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe 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
Apr 25, 2026F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not have a working program to monitor how antibiotics are used. Tracking antibiotic use helps make sure these drugs are given only when needed and remain effective. · from a complaint
Apr 25, 2026F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not regularly inspect bed frames, mattresses, and bed rails for safety, or the rails and mattresses were not attached safely to the frames.
Apr 25, 2026F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not give all staff the required training on its quality improvement program — the internal system for finding problems and making care better.
Apr 25, 2026E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required.
Apr 25, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Apr 25, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand.
Apr 25, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Apr 25, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection.
Apr 25, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation.
Apr 25, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Apr 25, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle.
Apr 25, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility used bed rails without first trying safer alternatives, or without assessing the resident's safety risk, discussing the risks and benefits with the resident or family, getting consent, and installing the rails correctly.
Apr 25, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide the social services residents need — such as counseling, help with adjustment, or connecting to outside resources — to achieve the best possible quality of life.
Apr 25, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time.
Apr 25, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Apr 25, 2026C · Minimal risk, facility-wideThe facility did not post its nurse staffing information every day. Nursing homes must publicly display how many nurses and aides are on duty each day.
Apr 25, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe 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.
Apr 25, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives.
Apr 25, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Apr 25, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
Apr 8, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · from a complaint
Mar 2, 2023F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe 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.
Mar 2, 2023F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors.
Mar 2, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration.
Mar 2, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Mar 2, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Mar 2, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Mar 2, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Mar 2, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Mar 2, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Mar 2, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (4 → 23).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2023100F
202550F
2026232G ▲

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)

No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.

Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)

MeasureThis facilityGeorgia avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)4.133.543.95top 15% in Georgia; top 34% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.240.500.69bottom 11% in Georgia; bottom 5% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.663.093.50top 13% in Georgia; top 35% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.190.350.48bottom 24% in Georgia; bottom 11% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)49.546.045.8bottom 38% in Georgia; bottom 38% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)60.044.542.9bottom 24% in Georgia; bottom 22% 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 3.89, RN 0.23, weekend 3.44. Staffing rating: 2/5.

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: 1/5 · long-stay residents: 1/5 · short-stay residents: 1/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Corporation

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Carrollton Manor INCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest02/01/2007
Thompson, EvelynIndividual5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest02/01/2007
Thompson, TraceIndividual5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest51%02/01/2007
Thompson, EvelynIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2007
Thompson, HenryIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2007
Thompson, SharonIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2007
Thompson, TraceIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2007
Thompson, TraceIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2007

Questions to ask on your visit

Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Carrollton Crossing of Journey LLC1.2 miCarrollton, GA★☆☆☆☆2/5abuse
Pruitthealth - Carrollton4.7 miCarrollton, GA★★★★☆4/5
Pine Knoll Path of Journey LLC5.3 miCarrollton, GA★☆☆☆☆3/5
Haralson Nsg & Rehab Center14.2 miBremen, GA★☆☆☆☆2/5
Pruitthealth - Franklin16.7 miFranklin, GA★★★★★4/5
Avalon Health and Rehabilitation18.8 miNewnan, GA★★★☆☆4/5
Newnan Health and Rehabilitation19.9 miNewnan, GA★★☆☆☆2/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Carrollton →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 115638.